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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2549

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Zaheer Abass – Appellant
Versus
M/o Information And Broadcasting – Respondent
T.A./566/2021



##PAGE1##

:: 1 :: TA 566/2021

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU

(RESERVED)

Hearing through video conferencing

Transfer Application No. 566/2021

Reserved on: - 07.07.2025

Pronounced on: - 27.02.2026

HON’BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, MEMBER (A)

Zaheer Abass, Age: Years

S/o Sh. Abdul Qayoom,

R/o Village Hasplote Tehsil Thanamandi, District Rajouri.

Petitioner

(Advocate: - Ms. Rozina Afzal)

Versus

1. Union of India Through its Secretary, Government of India,

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting New Delhi.

2. Director General, Directorate of field Publicity, Ministry of

Information and broadcasting, Government of India, East Block-4,

New Delhi-110066.

3. Directorate of field Publicity, Regional Office 2nd Floor, Media

Centre Building, Radio Colony, Panjthirthi, Jammu.

…Respondents

(Advocate:- Mr. Raghu Mehta, ld. Sr. C.G.S.C)

HARSHIT Digitally signed by

YADAV HARSHIT YADAV

##PAGE2##

:: 2 :: TA 566/2021

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The SWP No.2374/2017 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court

of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A

No.566/2021 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court seeking

following relief: -

a) Writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to issue

formal appointment order in favour of petitioner for the post of

Driver under OBC Category as the petitioner is selected by the

Selection Screening Committee on 25-26/02/2014.

b) Further Writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to

declare the act of respondents by which the respondents have

not issued formal appointment order in favour of petitioner for

the post of Driver under OBC Category as the petitioner is duly

selected by the Selection Screening Committee on 25-

26/02/2014, as ultra-virus, illegal, Arbitrary, unconstitutional

and contrary to the provisions of law and rules.

c) Such other additional or alternate relief which the Hon'ble

Court deems fit may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.

3. The facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioners in their pleadings

are as follows: -

a) The present Transfer Application arises out of SWP No.

2374/2017 which was originally filed before the Hon’ble High

HARSHIT Digitally signed by

YADAV HARSHIT YADAV

##PAGE3##

:: 3 :: TA 566/2021

Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and subsequently

transferred to this Tribunal and registered as T.A. No.

566/2021.

b) The petitioner, Zaheer Abass, is a permanent resident of District

Rajouri and was a registered candidate with the District

Employment Exchange, Rajouri under Registration No.

339/2012 with NCO Code No. 986.65 dated 14.03.2012. The

respondents advertised two posts of Drivers for Jammu Region

in the pay scale of Rs. 5200-20200 with Grade Pay Rs. 1900/-,

one under General Category and one under OBC Category.

c) The petitioner, being eligible and belonging to OBC Category,

was sponsored by the District Employment Exchange and

applied for the said post. He was issued a call letter dated

30.01.2014 directing him to appear for the Driving

Test/Interview scheduled from 25th to 27th February, 2014 at

Jammu. The petitioner appeared in the selection process and

participated in the Driving Test and Interview as per the

prescribed procedure.

HARSHIT Digitally signed by

YADAV HARSHIT YADAV

##PAGE4##

:: 4 :: TA 566/2021

d) It is pleaded that the respondents constituted a Screening

Committee which evaluated the candidates and shortlisted three

candidates under General Category and two candidates under

OBC Category. The petitioner secured 76 out of 100 marks and

figured at Serial No. 1 in the OBC Category merit list. The

petitioner asserts that he was duly selected by the Selection

Screening Committee.

e) Despite securing first position in the OBC Category, no formal

appointment order was issued in his favour. The petitioner

submitted representations and also served a legal notice upon

the respondents seeking issuance of appointment order, but no

action was taken. It is his case that once he was declared

su

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