SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(J&K) 257

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Sanjay Dhar, J.
Himmat Kumar Raina - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors - Respondents
WP(C) No. 4190 of 2019
Decided On : 13-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI with Mr. Sumant Sudan, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY DHAR, J.

01. The petitioner, through the medium of the present petition, has challenged order dated 01.11.2019 issued by respondent No. 2 whereby his request seeking his discharge from Air Force has been rejected. The petitioner has also sought a direction upon respondents No. 1 to 7 to release him from Air Force service by issuing necessary discharge certificate so as to enable him to continue in Junior Scale of the Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service. A further direction, restraining respondents No. 1 to 7 from taking disciplinary action against the petitioner for joining gazetted service of Junior Scale KAS, has also been sought by the petitioner.

02. The facts emanating from pleadings of the parties are that the petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Air Force on 27.06.2006 and his regular engagement with Indian Air Force is due to expire on 26.06.2026. It appears that the petitioner had joined the Indian Air Force after acquiring the qualification of intermediate as a Medical Assistant. It further appears that during the course of his employment, the petitioner completed his graduation in the year 2010. In the year 2016, the petitioner, in response to notification dated 18.06.2016 issued by J&K Public Service Commission, filled up his form for competing in the J&K Combined Competitive Examination, 2016.

03. It further appears that vide his application dated 20.06.2016, the petitioner had sought permission from the competent authority of the Air Force for submission of his application to participate in the J&K Combined Competitive Examination, 2016. However, the permission was not granted by the competent authority as the post for which the petitioner had applied does not fall under Group-A. It appears that despite this, the petitioner proceeded to sit in the examination and qualified the same. A select list was issued by the J&K Public Service Commission vide notification No. PSC/Exam/47-1/2019 dated 07.08.2019 wherein name of the petitioner was figuring.

04. Upon his selection as a Junior Scale KAS Officer, the petitioner submitted an application dated 27.08.2019 seeking his discharge from Air Force on the ground of his selection to the civil post of J&K Administrative Service. It seems that the said application was returned to the petitioner without forwarding the same to the Commanding Officer because he had been selected to a Group ‘B’ and not Group ‘A’ post. In the meantime, the petitioner came to be appointed as an Officer in the Junior Scale of J&K Administrative Service vide Government order No. 1015-GAD of 2019 dated 13-09-2019 and he was asked to join the service within twenty one days of the issuance of the said order.

05. After issuance of the appointment order in favour of the petitioner, he again made application dated 16.09.2019 before respondent No. 7 for his discharge from Air Force on the ground of his appointment to the civil post in J&K Administrative Service. Respondent No. 7 is stated to have recommended the discharge of the petitioner and his release from service. The said respondent also recommended waiver of non-compliance to AFO 4/2012 and AFO 33/2017.

06. The petitioner, however, did not receive the discharge order and in the meanwhile his request for extension in joining the fresh service was refused by respondent No. 9. The petitioner, therefore, proceeded to join the service on 01.10.2019 and it appears that he continues to serve as an Officer of J&K Administrative Service. On 01.11.2019, impugned order came to be issued by respondent No. 2 whereby the petitioner was informed that his request for discharge has not been approved and that the same has been rejected by the competent authority.

07. The petitioner has challenged the impugned action of the respondents No. 1 to 7 on the grounds that AFO No. 16/2008 dated 19.09.2008 has not been taken into consideration by the respondents while issuing the impugned order. According to the petitioner, the said order provides for discharg

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top