Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Jan 2: Taking suo-moto proceedings in a case, the High Court sought the records of the case from the court of Principal District Judge, Budgam and issued notice to revenue officials, plaintiff as also their counsel for appearing before the court.
While inspecting the records of court of Principal District Judge Budgam in his capacity as administrative judge, Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey sought the records of a case titled as Fida Hussan Versus Commissioner Secretary to Revenue Department and others and directed the registry to register this case as suo-moto proceedings.
Justice Magrey while taking serious note of the matter and the act of revenue official in defending the case said the Fida Hussan seems to have sued them (Revenue officials) to achieve what is mutually desired by them.
“The collusion between them is writ large on the face of the record. The plaintiff, who is shown to have been engaged as a casual labor in the year 2000 has seemingly been surreptitiously converted into a class IV employee, dehors the rules governing the field”, Justice Magrey said while examining the suit of Fida Hussain(Plaintiff).
The plaintiff, court said has also placed on record a photocopy of service book which he states to have been prepared. “The Tehsildar Settlement, Budgam, seems to have been the person to manage all this for the plaintiff”, said Justice Magrey.
Court said the Presiding Officer (District Judge Budgam) has overlooked the matter and did not notice the serving report of court server which is ambiguous and proceeded exparte against revenue officials without hearing them.
” On going through the minutes / proceedings of the case files both at Chadoora and Budgam, I have noticed serious irregularities being committed by the process Servers in effecting service of summons on defendants/respondents. Such irregularities, which have gone unnoticed by the Presiding Officers, cast serious doubt about the functioning of Process Serving Agency in the District”, Justice Magrey observed and added “The suit was instituted on 08-08-2015 and on 08-12-2015 it has been brought to the stage of recording of ex parte evidence. The trial court has also passed an interim order dated 16-11-2015, directing defendants 3 and 4 in the suit to release pay of the plaintiff for the period he has worked. The word ‘pay’ has a specific connotation in the service rules and is significant in light of the pleadings made in the plaint”.
Court also added that this is not the right stage to suppose that the trial court would overlook the facts pleaded in the suit and the annexure placed on record at the time of weighing the evidence that may be produced by the plaintiff, or that the ‘collusive nature’ of the suit would go unnoticed, yet in light of the peculiar facts attendant to the case and the circumstances in which the defendants in the case have remained absent from the proceedings, if served in reality, and have been set ex parte.
The plaintiff Fida Hussain has filed a suit before the trial court praying therein for a decree to declare him entitled to regularization of his service as driver in terms of relevant rules with effect from 1992/1993 “pursuant to his continued services discharged by him with defendants department since 1986” and a decree of mandatory injunction commanding the official respondents to regularize his services and grant/release all service benefits with effect from 1992/1993 “having completed seven years of service in the said year”.
Court directed the Registry to fax a copy of this order to the Principal District Judge, Budgam, today itself for his records, information and the information of the counsel for the plaintiff.
Follow our WhatsApp channel