Udham Singh vs Ut Of J&K And Ors on 3 March, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Udham Singh vs Ut Of J&K And Ors on 3 March, 2025

Bench: Sanjeev Kumar, Moksha Khajuria Kazmi

                                                                Sr. No. 29

     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT JAMMU

                                                WP (C) No. 2267/2024

Udham Singh                                                .... Petitioner(s)
                        Through:-    Mr. K.D.S Kotwal, Advocate with
                                     Ms. Pariksha Parmar, Advocate.

                  V/s

UT of J&K and Ors.                                         .....Respondent(s)

                        Through:-    Mr. Suneel Malhotra, GA.
CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
           HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
                                 ORDER

03.03.2025

1. This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by the
petitioner is directed against an order and judgment dated 14.08.2024 passed
by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu [“the Tribunal”] in OA No.
1489/2021 titled “Udham Singh Vs. UT of J&K and Ors” whereby the
Tribunal has disposed of the O.A. with a direction to the respondents to
consider the case of the petitioner herein in the light of the judgment passed
by the Tribunal in OA No. 61/1167/2021 by passing a reasoned and speaking
order.

2. The limited grievance projected by learned counsel for the petitioner is
that though the Tribunal has directed to consider the case of the petitioner for
regularization of his services in terms of the judgment passed by the Tribunal
in O.A. No. 61/1167/2021 yet, the order of the respondents rejecting the claim
of the petitioner for regularization dated 16.07.2020, which was impugned
before the Tribunal, has not been specifically quashed.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on
record, we are of the considered opinion that the operative portion of the
impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal calling upon the respondents to
consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in terms of the judgment
dated 22.03.2024 passed in O.A. No. 61/1167/2021 cannot be implemented or
complied with unless order dated 16.07.2020 passed by the respondents
rejecting the claim of the petitioner for regularization, is specifically quashed.

4. From reading of the operative portion of the judgment impugned, it
clearly transpires that order dated 16.07.2020 which was the subject matter of
challenge in O.A. before the Tribunal has been impliedly quashed, though
there is no specific direction passed by the Tribunal.

5. For the foregoing reasons, we allow this petition partially and provide
that the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services shall be
considered in terms of Judgment dated 22.03.2024 passed by the Tribunal in
O.A. No. 61/1167/2021 which has been upheld by this Court in WP(C) No.
2083/2024, by passing a reasoned and speaking order and earlier order of the
respondents dated 16.07.2020, whereby the claim of the petitioner for
regularization of SRO 64 of 1994 was rejected, shall be deemed to have been
quashed.

              (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi)                      (Sanjeev Kumar)
                     Judge                                     Judge

Jammu:
03.03.2025
Neha-1