Mukhtar Ahmad Bhat vs Union Territory Of Jk & Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 675 j&K/2

                                                                      Serial No. 132
                                                                Supplementary 1 Causelist
                                                                  (Through Virtual Mode)


              HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                        AT SRINAGAR
                                                            CM No. 4119/2021
                                                       In WP(C) No. 1218/2021
                                                            CM No. 4120/2021

Mukhtar Ahmad Bhat.
                                                              ......Petitioner(s)
                          Through: Mr M.A. Beigh, Advocate.
                                       vs
Union Territory of JK & Anr.
                                                              ......Respondent(s)
                          Through: Ms Asifa Padroo, AAG for R-1.
                                   Mr Rais Ud Din Ganai, GA for R-2.

CORAM:

             Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.

                                 ORDER

30.06.2021

CM No. 4119/2021;

On the set of facts and the ground urged coupled with submissions

made at Bar, the instant application is allowed and requirement of affixing the

court fee in the shape of stamps etc. with the petition dispensed with for the

time being. However, the deficiency shall be made good as and when Court

starts functioning in normal manner. CM disposed of accordingly.

WP(C) No. 1218/2021 CM No. 4120/2021;

The instant petition is filed by the petitioner, who claims to have retired

from services on 31st of May, 2021, challenging the memorandum bearing No.

HUD-LIT0ULBK/87/2021 (C.No. 17860) dated 28th of May, 2021, in terms

whereof the Government has issued memorandum of charges against the

petitioner. The impugned memorandum is challenged on the grounds detailed

out in the petition with particular reference that there is no provision in the rules which governs the government to initiate departmental inquiry and

continue with the same after retirement of the government employee.

Mr M.A. Beigh, learned appearing counsel for the petitioner has while

strengthening his claim for the relief, made reference to the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (1999) 3 SCC 666 titled Bhagirathi Jena

versus Board of Directors, O.S.F.C & Ors.

Before proceeding further in the matter, it has become necessary to seek

response from the respondents.

Notice in the main petition as well as in connected CM.

Ms Asifa Padroo, learned AAG waives notice on behalf of Respondent

No. 1; Mr Rais Ud Din Ganai, learned GA waives notice on behalf of

Respondent No. 2. Reply by or before next date of hearing.

Respondent No. 1 shall in the reply disclose the rule in terms whereof

departmental proceedings already initiated against the petitioner, can continue

contrary to the judgment (supra) of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

List on Thursday, the 8th of July, 2021 in the Daily Supplementary Case

List.

Meanwhile, no final decision shall be taken on the already initiated

proceedings against the petitioner.

Copy of this order be provided to the learned appearing counsel for the

parties under the seal and signature of Bench Secretary, by any available

mode.

(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR:

30.06.2021 "Hamid"

ABDUL HAMID BHAT 2021.06.30 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document