Shiv Kumar Padha vs Union Territory Of J&K And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1623 j&K

                                                                          Sr. No. 2



     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU
CJ Court

Case: WP (C) No. 2586 of 2021


Shiv Kumar Padha                                        .....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

                                Through :- Smt. Rozina Afzal, Advocate.

                          v/s

Union Territory of J&K and Others                                .....Respondent(s)

                                Through :- .


      CORAM:
      HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

                                    ORDER

01. Heard Smt. Rozina Afzal, learned counsel for the petitioner.

02. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition against the judgment and

order dated 3rd May 2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal,

(hereinafter for short 'the Tribunal') Jammu Bench dismissing his transfer

application.

03. The petitioner had filed a writ petition which was transferred to the

Tribunal alleging that he was appointed as Teacher in the wrong pay scale

of 220-430 whereas his appointment ought to have been made in the pay scale

of 430-700.

04. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the aforesaid

order has been passed without hearing the counsel for the petitioner and since

the cause of action was of recurring nature the petition could not have been

dismissed on the ground of delay.

05. No doubt, the counsel for the petitioner was not heard but the order

passed by the Tribunal is on merits and we have accorded the petitioner the

right of hearing. The order categorically states that the petitioner was appointed

in the above referred pay scale way back on 02.09.1974 and that he never

raised any objection against the said appointment or to grant of wrong pay

scale. Thus, having regard to the long service rendered by the petitioner in a

particular pay scale for decades together, it is not open for him to claim higher

pay scale that too without refereeing to any provision of law.

06. We have offered opportunity of hearing to the petitioner but we are not

satisfied that the petitioner can be granted any benefit of revision in pay scale

after he had accepted the appointment without any protest with open eyes and

took no objection for years together. The petitioner having worked in pay scale

of 220-430 from 1974 till 2002 is not entitled to raise the issue after such a

long distance of time when the matter was practically dead.

07. The writ petition has no merit and is dismissed.

                             (SANJAY DHAR)               (PANKAJ MITHAL)
                                     JUDGE                CHIEF JUSTICE
JAMMU
06.12.2021
Tilak