Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Jan 2: Division Bench of the High Court comprising Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Sindhu Sharma has stayed the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) whereby Tribunal quashed the final seniority list of Sub-Inspectors in Executive Wing of J&K Police issued vide PHQ Order No.2678 dated 12.07.2019.
“It was urged that the seniority could have been framed on the basis of merit obtained in the basic induction training course only in accordance with the Rules and that the reliance placed by the Tribunal on the Division Bench judgment in Rohit Gupta & Ors Versus Ajay Kumar and Others was misplaced as the same pertains to the Prosecuting Officers, which was a class apart from the serving police agency (Executive Wing)”, the DB observed.
The DB further said, “counsel for the caveators/private respondents, on the other hand, placed overwhelming reliance upon the judgment to emphasize the point that the view expressed by the Tribunal was legally justified”, adding “it is not denied that the petitioners had undergone the basic induction training course of one year before getting confirmed as direct recruits Sub Inspectors”.
“On the perusal of the Rule 111(2) of the Police Rules, it, prima facie, appears that seniority of candidates directly appointed on the same date, who were required to pass any course or departmental examination as a necessary condition of their subsequent confirmation would depend on their order of merit in such course or examination”, the DB said, adding “this part of the rule cannot be easily brushed aside in its application even on its plain reading”.
The DB was of the opinion that the petitioners have succeeded in making out a prima facie case and accordingly issued notice in the main petition as also in application.
In the meantime, subject to objections and till next date of hearing, operation of the judgment and order impugned dated 9.12.2020 shall remain stayed, the DB directed, adding “any promotions made on the basis of the impugned seniority list questioned by the private respondents shall remain subject to the outcome of the present petition”.