CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member, Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member
Ajaz Hussain – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent
Original Application No. 159/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant seeks notional seniority from 2015 selection delayed by administration. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. respondents defend prospective seniority per rule 24 for waiting list. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. notional seniority granted as delay due to administrative lapse, not candidate. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. seniority refixed w.e.f. 2015 without back wages; oa allowed. (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -
I) Set-aside Govt. order No. 47-PW (R&B) of 2025 Dated 12.02.2025 the extent of inclusion of respondents 3 to 221 in the final seniority list of the Degree Holder Junior Engineers (Civil) who have been placed at Serial No. 742 to Serial No. 961 over and above the applicant illegally, arbitrarily and in violation of the settled legal position.
II) Set-aside the decision taken by the respondent No.1 whereby the claim of the applicant for inclusion in the final seniority list of the Degree Holder Junior Engineers (Civil) notionally with effect from 07.09.2015 has been rejected illegally arbitrarily and without any lawful justification.
III) Directing the respondent No.1 to place the name of the applicant over and above respondents 3 to 221 in the final seniority list of the Degree Holder Junior Engineers(Civil) by granting notional Seniority w.e.f. 07.09.2015.
Prayer for the grant of any other interim or final relief as may be deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the applicant and against the respondents.
2. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, calling in question Government Order No. 47-PW (R&B) of 2025 dated 12.02.2025 to the extent it places respondents 3 to 221 above the applicant in the final seniority list of Degree Holder Junior Engineers (Civil) and further rejects the applicant’s claim for grant of notional seniority with effect from 07.09.2015, despite his selection being relatable to the same recruitment process.
3. The facts, briefly stated, are that the applicant was a candidate in the selection process conducted by the J&K Services Selection Board for "Wazarat Road, Opposite Chief Secretary Camp office Jammu Jandk", Phone the post of Junior Engineer (Civil), pursuant to which a select list was issued in the year 2015. The applicant figured at Serial No. 2 in the waiting list under the RBA category. One candidate from the waiting list was appointed, but despite availability of vacancies, the applicant was not recommended, compelling him to approach the Hon’ble High Court by way of SWP No. 2015/2017. The writ petition was disposed of on 11.12.2017 with a direction to accord consideration to the applicant’s case. Consequent thereto, the applicant was appointed vide Government Order No. 483-PW (R&B) of 2018 dated 06.09.2018, with a specific stipulation that his inter-se seniority would be fixed separately.
4. It is the grievance of the applicant that although he belongs to the same batch of Degree Holder Junior Engineers whose seniority has been reckoned w.e.f. 07.09.2015, his case was excluded from the final seniority list issued in 2019 and even from the tentative seniority list issued on 03.01.2025, forcing him to submit a detailed representation. Though his name was eventually included in the final seniority list dated 12.02.2025, the respondents have assigned him seniority only from 06.09.2018, thereby placing respondents 3 to 221, who are admittedly junior in merit and belong to the same selection process, above him. The applicant asserts that such denial of notional seniority is arbitrary, violative of Rule 24 of the J&K CCA Rules, 1956, and offends Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, particularly when the delay in appointment was solely attributable to administrative lapse and not to any fault on his part.
5. The respondents, in their reply, do
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.