It seemed that the decision of the case depended upon the petitioner’s service as Lecturer on an ad-hoc basis with the Department of Physics, University of Kashmir, was eligible to include his seniority and experience in the National Institute of Technology, Srinagar. Such was held by the Hon’ble High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh, at Srinagar before the Hon’ble Justice Sanjay Dhar in the matter of Dr. Ghulam Rasool Vs. Union Of India & Ors [SWP No.2255/2014].
In this case, the petitioner filed an instant Writ Petition to sought some relief. In the National Institute of Technology, Srinagar, the petitioner worked as a lecturer. He also worked as a lecturer on an impromptu basis in the Department of Physics, University of Kashmir before joining the said institute in Srinagar. The petitioner satiated that his inclusion of the impromptu service that he contributed to the University of Kashmir would make him a senior Lecturer in the National Institute of Technology, Srinagar, which was required for paving the way to grant of further promotion in his favour. Before he filed this petition, another petition bearing SWP No.1941/2010 was filed, where he claimed similar reliefs from the court, was disposed of. The respondents were challenged by the petitioner because he believed that the rejection of his representation was not open to the respondents.
The Respondents on the other hand stated that the selection of the petitioner as Lecturer in the Department of Physics, University of Kashmir, on an impromptu was due to the recommendation made by the Head of the Department and not by a Selection Committee. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of service which he contributed at the University of Kashmir. Moreover, the respondents claimed that all the benefits that the petitioner was entitled to, were released under Career Advancement Schemes. However, in a letter from the University of Kashmir bearing No. F(Certificate-Adhoc Aptt)DAA/KU/16 dated 25.05.2016, stated that a proper Selection Committee was present in the selection of the petitioner. It was further revealed that the increments were released in favour of the petitioner which made it clear that his selection was made by following due procedure during his ad-hoc services.
The Hon’ble Court stated that “It has been further contended by learned counsel for the respondents that if seniority of the petitioner is refixed by giving the benefit of past service to him, it would unsettle the seniority of other incumbents of similar posts working in the Institute. The argument has no merit for the reason that the petitioner has already impleaded all such persons as respondents who are going to be affected by refixation of his seniority. Even otherwise, petitioner now retired has from service, as such, he would only be entitled to monetary benefits and even after according up-gradation/promotion to him in terms of Career Advancement Schemes, no prejudice will be caused to those who are still in service … The writ petition shall stand disposed of in the above terms.”
Judgment reviewed by Bipasha Kundu