Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Union Territory Of J And K And Ors vs Suhail Afzal Dar And Others on 25 August, 2025
Author: Rajnesh Oswal
Bench: Rajnesh Oswal
Sr. No.14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 581/2024 CM(1590/2024) CM(8420/2024)
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS ...Petitioner(s)/appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy. AG
Vs.
SUHAIL AFZAL DAR AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. A. H. Naik, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Zia, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
ORDER
25-08-2025
1. Aggrieved by an order and judgment dated 30.10.2019 passed by the
learned Single Judge in SWP No. 1888/2015 (Maria Nazir and Ors. Vs.
State of JK and Ors.), the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and others
had preferred an intra-court appeal (LPA No. 109/2020) under Clause 12 of
the letters Patent.
2. The Division Bench, upon consideration of the matter in issue, vide
order and judgment dated 11.12.2020, allowed the appeal and the judgment
dated 30.10.2019 was set aside:
"Accordingly, this appeal is accepted and the
judgment of the learned Single Judge is set aside. We,
however, direct the Chief Education Officer, Kulgam,
to place the whole record before the
Commissioner/Secretary to Government School
Education Department, who will himself or through a
committee constituted by him, go into the legality or
otherwise of the selection process carried by the then
Incharge Chief Education Officer, Kulgam, and if
upon such verification, it is found that the selection
process carried out by the then Chief Education
Officer was fair and the candidates had been selected
on the basis of their merit and in accordance with the
rules, shall proceed to finalize the select list and issue
formal orders of appointment in favour of the selected
candidates, notwithstanding the fact that in the
selection committee which conducted the recruitment
process, nominee of the Head of the Department was
not associated. Let this exercise be completed by
Commissioner/Secretary to Government School
Education Department within a period of four weeks
from the date copy of this order is served upon him."
3. And in compliance to the directions issued by the Division Bench,
the respondent authorities re-examined the matter and vide order dated
28.07.2021, declared the entire selection process as void ab-initio. Further, it
was observed that the matter was required to be referred to the investigating
agency to probe the role of the officials involved in the mala-fide
preparation of the select list.
4. Aggrieved of the said order, the respondents herein preferred OA
No. 1824/2021 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar. And
vide impugned order dated 21.12.2023, the learned Tribunal set aside the
order dated 28.07.2021 and left it open to the appellants to re-examine the
matter and pass fresh orders in accordance with law as also the observations
recorded by the Coordinate Bench while deciding LPA No. 109/2020.
5. Thus, this appeal.
6. The only argument advanced by the learned counsel for the parties is
that ex-facie the impugned order dated 21.12.2023 is perverse and
unsustainable, for the Tribunal has failed to assign any reason in support
thereof. He submits that while adjudicating upon the rights and obligations
of the parties, the Division Bench in its judgment dated 11.12.2020 had
recorded crucial observations and in compliance thereto, the authorities
reexamined the matter in right earnest and had passed a comprehensive order
dated 28.07.2021.
7. With reference to the impugned order and judgment, he asserts that
although the Tribunal noticed the arguments advanced by the learned
counsel for the parties but apparently failed to deal with any of those. And
without assigning any reasons, set aside the order dated 28.07.2021. Thus.
the impugned order is non-speaking and bereft of any reason.
8. In response, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents
submits that in fact the order passed by the authorities on 28.07.2021, was/is
also unsustainable, for it was passed de-hors the observations recorded by
the Division Bench in its judgment dated 11.12.2020. However, he as always
fairly concedes that the impugned order and judgment being bereft of any
reasoning is indefensible. Therefore, it would be in the interest of both the
parties that the same be set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal
for reconsideration.
9. In the wake of position sketched above, and in terms of the statement
by the learned counsel for the parties, the impugned order dated 21.12.2023,
is set aside, and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration and
to pass orders afresh in accordance with law.
10. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. This order
shall not, however, constitute any expression of opinion on the case of either
party. For the Tribunal shall proceed to decide the matter afresh and strictly
in accordance with law.
11. However, considering that the parties have been litigating for the
past several years, we consider it necessary to request the Tribunal to finally
dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible preferably within eight
weeks from the receipt of certified copy of this order.
(RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
SRINAGAR
25-08-2025
Aadil
