Mohammad Syed Malik vs Union Territory Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.

M.S.LATIF, M (J) oral

01/ Through the medium of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, sought the following relief :

02/ The short grievance of the petitioner, as emerges from the pleadings in this O.A, is that the increment arrears as per entitlement of the petitioner, amounting to rupees 2,72,614/- (two lakh seventy two thousand six hundred fourteen only), has not been

released in his favour by the respondent department despite same having been approved by the competent authority as mentioned in various communications appended herewith.

03/ Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner retired from government services on 31.03.2021 when he was working on the post of Senior Grade Constable SGCT under belt No. 560/KGM, PID No. EXK881395, Accordingly his case was referred to the office of Accountant General (A&E) J&K Srinagar by office of respondent No. 6 for fixation of pension and other retiral benefits in his favour. The said office had returned the case of petitioner pursuant to their communication No. PNR/ 2/SH /183618/2021/247-48 dated 08.06.2021 to the office of respondent No. 3 (Senior Superintendent of Police) by virtue of which it was stated that the pay of the petitioner has not been regulated correctly and annual increment of 7/2018 has not been released. Learned counsel submits that in terms of order No. GB/Rtd174/2021/33107-09 dated 16.07.2021 the fixation, in compliance to communication dated 08.06.2021, was rectified and fresh fixation was made. He further submitted that the arrears, those which accrued to the petitioner, were calculated and were forwarded for sanction and approval for its disbursement to the concerned authority. Accordingly, his pay was fixed and his post retiral benefits were also released in his favour. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that the arrears which were withheld by the respondent department were calculated and the proposal for the amount of Rs. 272614/- on account of increment arrears was submitted to the office of respondent No.2 by respondent No.3 in terms of communication dated 31.07.2021, however, it was mentioned that arrears cannot be

disbursed in favour of the petitioner as his claim is more than two years old, as such, it requires concurrence of Finance Department is required.

04/ Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that office of Financial Advisor J&K Srinagar/Jammu has referred the matter to Financial Advisor CAO/PHQ Home Department, civil Secretariat J&K for its sanction/approval for drawl of arrears in terms of communication dated 10.03.2022 and, as stated, the office of Financial Advisor, Home Department, had referred the matter to respondent No. 2 - Director General of Police, who directed that the matter be examined case wise and on individual basis and furnish the reasons/background for approval of these claims along with specific recommendations to the Home department. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the petitioner for approval, was recommended to the administrative department, mention of which was also made in communication dated 11.07.2023. However, as stated, the process for releasing of arrears to the petitioner has not reached to its logical end and the office of Accounts Officer, District Police Office, Kulgam, again referred the matter to respondent No.2 pursuant to communication No. Actts/A/Sanction/23/34391-93 dated 19.07.2023 in terms of which, the matter has again been recommended for proper sanction of the competent authority and prior concurrence of the finance department for the claim projected by the petitioner.

05/ Case of the petitioner is that though the arrears were calculated and admitted by the respondent department but same have not been released in his favour, constraining him to file the

representation before the office of respondent No.3 (Senior Superintendent of Police) requesting therein that the arrears be released in his favour pending since 15.05.2025 but of no avail.

06/ Be that as it may, after arguing the matter for a considerable period of time, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if the respondents are directed to treat this petition as comprehensive representation of the petitioner and decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

07/ Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that they have no objection if the present O.A is disposed of with appropriate directions, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents.

08/ Heard learned counsel for the parties at length, perused the material available on record.

09/ Having regard to the limited and innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present O.A is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to treat this petition together with all documents and annexures appended thereto as well as the representations, if any filed by the petitioner earlier, as a comprehensive representation and consider and decide the averments put forth therein by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions, rules and governing legal framework, of course, subject to the petitioner’s eligibility and entitlement under law and provided there is no legal impediment in doing so. Needful to be done within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order and

copy of this O.A is served upon the respondents.

10/ In the backdrop of what has been discussed above, this O.A 1210/2025 is disposed of along with connected M.As, if any.