Retrospective appointments must ensure promotion eligibility and respect seniority as per judicial rulings.

ORDER

Per Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Singh Dogra, J.M.

The applicant being aggrieved by the denial of his promotion and fixing his seniority at the bottom of the batch of 2007 moved the Hon’ble High Court in SWP No. 1530 of 2018. After the promulgation of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019 and the formation of UT of J&K, the case was made over to this Tribunal where it was re-numbered as TA 6454 of 2021. The applicant has prayed for the following relief:

i) Writ, order of direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to grant the In-Situ promotion in favour of the applicant w.e.f. August 2016 after computing the nine years of service w.e.f. 7th August, 2007 in the Pay Band of Rs.2400, with all Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay consequential benefits; of

ii) Writ, order of direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and promote the applicant as Selection Grade Constable w.e.f. 1st July, 2017 by treating him as an appointee of 2007, with all consequential benefits;

iii) Writ, order of direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing Communication No: APHQ/Pers- CRC/Rep03/ 2018/22785 dated 14 June, 2018 issued by the respondent No.2:

iv) Writ, order of direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to fix the seniority of the applicant vis-à-vis the appointees of 2007 in IRP 11th Bn and IRP 12th Bn by taking into account the merit secured by the applicant in the Basic Recruitment Training Course and by treating the applicant as of the same batch as the above mentioned appointees of the 2007 in the aforesaid two Bns;

v) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted in favour of the applicant and against the respondents along with cost.

2. The fact of the case is that –

a) It is submitted by the applicant that the respondents vide two advertisement notices issued in the year 2006 invited applications for appointment against the posts of Constable in the J&K Armed Police (IRP 11th and 12th Bns). The applicant being eligible and also belonging to the ST category responded to the aforesaid advertisement notices and participated in the selection process. But the applicant was denied appointment though the persons with less merit as compared to the applicant were selected and appointed in the year 2007.

b) The applicant being aggrieved of denial of appointment approached the Hon’ble High Court in SWP No.111/2008. The Hon'ble High Court after hearing the respondents, vide its judgment dated 23.12.2015 directed the respondents to appoint the applicant against any vacant post as Constable in the department and the applicant was entitled to all benefits notionally w.e.f. the date the private respondents were so appointed.

c) Pursuant to the aforesaid judgment, the issue was considered by the Police Headquarters and the then Director General of Police vide his Order No:1589 of 2016 dated 31.5.2016 by a speaking order granted approval to the provisional appointment of the applicant as a Constable in IRP 11th and 12th BNs w.e.f. the date private respondents in SWP No. 111/2008 had been appointed. After the approval was granted by the Director General of Police, the respondent No.2 vide his Order No:390 of 2016 dated 20.6.2016 allotted IRP 11 Bn for the appointment of the applicant and Commandant IRP 11 Bo was directed to issue the appointment order in favour of the applicant after fulfillment of all the pre-selection formalities including the CID verification.

d) Commandant IRP 11th Bn., Anantnag vide his Order No:703 of 2016 dated 1