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

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 5773

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Judicial Member, Ms. Pragya Sahay Saksena, Administrative Member
Mohd. Akbar Batt, Mohd. Amin, Amar Raj, Charanjeet Singh, Bashir Ahmed, Mohd. Iqbal Dar, Mohd. Akhter Sheikh, Ashfaque Ahmed, Girdhari Lal, Jeetendar Dev, Altaf Hussain, Abdul Hamid, Shamash Din, Rayaz Ahmed, Mohd. Din, Avtar Singh, Ab. Rashid Parray, Bashir Ahmed, Mohd. Hanief Matoo, Naib Chand, Mohd. Sabir, Phool Singh, Abdul Aziz, Javeed Iqbal, Gh. Hassan, Ab. Qayoom, Mohd. Ashraf, Ghulam Nabi, Mohd. Shafi, Prem Nath, Bansi Lal, Fazal Hussain, Tej Ram, Lehar Singh, Bishan Lal, Khursheed Ahmed, Joginder Parshad, Gh. Hassan, Bashir Mohd., Mangta Sheikh, Satish Kumar, Abdullaha Batt, Ghulam Hassan, Abdul Rasheed, Raj Kumar, Akhter Hussain, Nizam-ud-Din Batt, Bakhtawar, Mohdmmad Shrief, Mohd. Ashraf, Gh. Mohd. Batt, Nor Din, Nazir Ahmed, Abdul Fattah Natnoo, Mohd. Sabir, Abdul Rashid, Hafeeaullah, Rustum, Sheer Mohd., Jamal Sheikh, Mohd. Iqbal, Lal Din, Phoola Singh, Himmat Singh, Ramesh Kumar, Liaqat Ali – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu & Kashmir through its Chief Secretary, J&K Government, Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sheikh Najeeb
For the Respondents:Mr. Sudesh Magotra, A.A.G for Respondent No. 1, Mr. Dewakar Sharma, D.A.G. for Respondents No. 2 to 5

ORDER

Per:- Sanjeev Gupta, Judicial Member

This is the second round of litigation. In the first round, the applicants seeking regularization of their services under the provisions of SRO 64 of 1994, had approached the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir by filing SWP No. 757 of 2008 which was disposed of by Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 13.08.2009 with direction to respondents to consider the case of the applicants for regularization in accordance with rules and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months. In compliance to directions of the Hon’ble High Court, the respondents considered the case of the applicants for regularization, however, rejected the same vide order dated 11.05.2010 on the ground that their case does not fall within the ambit and provisions of SRO 64 of 1994.

2. Aggrieved of rejection order dated 11.05.2010, the applicants again approached the Hon’ble High Court by medium of SWP No. 2677 of 2010 seeking the following reliefs:-

“i). Writ of Certiorari quashing Order No. PJEH/GE/24 of 2010 dated 11.5.2010 issued by respondent No. 3 whereby on so-called consideration of the case of the petitioners in light of judgement dated 13.8.2009 passed by

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top