The respondent, having succeeded in his Petition for appointment, was entitled to all benefits admissible to him, and the inaction of the appellants infringed his fundamental rights.

JUDGMENT :

Chowdhary, J.

1. This intra Court appeal, under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, has been preferred by the Appellants against the final Order/Judgment dated 18th of September, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in SWP No. 2276/2015 titled ‘Ghulam Ahmad Wani v. State of Jammu and Kashmir & Anr.’, whereby the said Writ Petition filed by the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein stands allowed.

2. From the perusal of the pleadings on record, it emerges that a Writ Petition bearing SWP No. 3269 of 1992 came to be filed by the Respondent herein, challenging the selection and the appointment of private respondents therein as Prosecuting Officers. The said Writ Petition was decided by an Order dated 26th of November, 2009, whereby the Respondents therein were directed to consider the case of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein for his appointment against the post of Prosecuting Officer and pass appropriate orders in that behalf within a period of four weeks. In compliance of the aforesaid Judgment, the Respondent No. 2/Appellant No.2 herein appears to have issued an Order dated 15th of September, 2010, whereby the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein was appointed as Prosecuting Officer.

3. Since, the aforesaid Order was silent about the entitlement of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein from the day the illegal appointments were made and, as such, the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein filed a representation immediately after the issuance of Order dated 15th of September, 2010. In the representation, it was prayed that the seniority of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein be fixed from the day the other appointees were appointed, that is 1st of January, 1993 and the consequential benefits of promotion may also be awarded in his favour.

4. The representation was not decided despite lapse of considerable period of time, which compelled the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein to file another Writ Petition bearing SWP No. 1939 of 2013, which came to be disposed of on 9th of December, 2013, with the direction to the Respondent No. 2/Appellant No.2 herein to consider the representation of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein for fixing of his seniority ahead of the private Respondents in SWP No. 3269 of 1992 and pass a consideration order within a period of two months. The said Judgment passed by this Court was considered and the claim of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein was rejected by an Order dated 29th of November, 2014, on the ground that there is no specific direction for the appointment of the Writ Petitioner with retrospective effect or even allowing his seniority on notional basis.

5. This order of consideration was challenged by the Writ Petitioner through the medium of SWP No. 2276/2015, wherein the Writ Petitioner, besides seeking quashing of Order dated 29th of November, 2014, also sought a direction upon the Respondents therein/Appellants herein to give effect to the order of appointment of the Writ Petitioner placing him senior to ineligible candidates. The Respondents resisted the Petition of the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein on the grounds, inter alia, that in compliance of the Judgment dated 26th of November, 2009, the Writ petitioner was appointed as a Prosecuting Officer with prospective effect, as there was no specific direction in the Judgment for his appointment retrospectively or even allowing him seniority or promotion on notional basis at par with those who had applied along with him and were appointed as Prosecuting Officers in the Police Department in the year 1993. The Writ Court, after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, in terms of impugned Judgment dated 18th of September, 2018, allowed the Petition and quashed the Order dated 29th of November, 2014, besides holding the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein entitled to all the consequential benefits, including the promotion. The Writ Court further directed that the Writ Petitioner/Respondent herein shall figure over and above the heads o