Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, June 4: Jammu and Kashmir High Court today came down heavily on Department of Archives, Archaeology and Museums Srinagar over suspension of employees over theft of manuscript of Holy Quran from the SPS Museum Srinagar.
Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey while deciding the petition of two employees of archaeology department who were held responsible for theft of manuscript of Holy Quran from the SPS Museum Srinagar bearing seal of Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb and they were suspended for negligence during the duty.
The two employees were suspended in 2010, seven years later after the theft and the suspension order reads: “As per the rules and taking into consideration failure of the officials to discharge their legitimate duties, the period of suspension of Nazir Ahmad Baroo, Ex-Museum Assistant and Shamima Akhter, Attendant is treated on leave whatever kind due to them.”
The court quashed the suspension order and court order of 2012 and directed for fresh look in the matter. “The impugned order dated 24.10.2012 is quashed with direction to the respondents to pass fresh orders in the matter keeping in view the fact that the petitioners have not been found guilty in any regular, legitimate and lawful enquiry” and “coupled with the fact that they have not been found connected to the commission of the crime of theft by the Crime Branch during the investigation”, court said.
Court while passing the elaborated judgment and quashing the impugned order of Director Museums observed: “The judicial conscious constrains this court to hold that the respondents have given totally unfair deal to the petitioners and have acted in the matter in a perfunctory and arbitrary manner and treating the entire suspension period of petitioners as on leave deserves to be quashed”.
Court pulled up the respondents for prolonging the suspension of petitioners unnecessarily and said the department has acted arbitrarily and without any justification in the matter and constrained the petitioners in filing the third round of litigation.
“There was no justification or a cogent reason for the respondents to have slept over the matter and prolonged the suspension of the petitioners. The respondents seem to have been induced and influenced to prolonging the agony of the petitioners by their perceived extraneous consideration”, reads the Judgment of Justice Magrey.
In so far as challenging the order of respondents wherein some punishments were imposed on the respondents besides their suspension court rejected the prayer as the petitioner had opted in their earlier writ petition not to press this prayer.
Referring the citation of apex court, the HC said the law on the point is settled: “Once a prayer is made in the earlier petition and is not pressed, and no liberty is reserved to repeat the prayer in a subsequent writ petition, if need be, it will be deemed to have been heard and decided against the party not pressing the relief as the principle of ‘res judicata’ is hit by repeating the relief clause”, court said.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel