HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU (Through Virtual Mode for Srinagar) WP(C) No. 1273/2025 CM No. 3036/2025 CAV No. 1024/2025 Reserved on 26.05.2025 Pronounced on 30.08.2025 (i) UT of J&K through Principal Secretary, Finance Department,Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar. (ii) Commissioner, State Taxes, Government of J&K, Excise & Taxation Complex, Rail Head, Jammu. (iii) Additional Commissioner, State Taxes (Administration& Enforcement), Excise & Taxation Complex, Rail Head, Jammu. (iv) Deputy Excise Commissioner (Executive), Excise Department, Excise & Taxation Complex, Rail Head, Jammu. …. Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. V/s (i) Narinder Kumar Sharma, S/o Muni Lal Sharma, R/o H. No. 432, Purani Mandi, Jammu. (ii) Anshu Daffara, S/o Bishan Lal, R/o Shiv Nagar, Tehsil & District Jammu. …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhirash Sharma, Abhimanyu Sharma and Ms. Shailja Bakshi, Advocates. CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE JUDGMENT Per: Sindhu Sharma-J 01. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for quashing the order dated 29.01.2025, passed by the Central Administration Tribunal, Jammu Bench (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’), in O.A. No. 61/43/2024. The petitioners have further sought a direction to summon the record of the said O.A. WP(C) No. 1273/2025 02. The respondent No. 1 was appointed as a Junior Scale Stenographer in the J&K Excise & Sales Tax Department in the pay scale of Rs. 5000–8000, by virtue of Government Order No. 125-F of 2004 dated 18.06.2004. The service conditions and promotional avenues of the employees of the department are governed by the J&K Excise and Sales Tax (Subordinate Service) Recruitment Rules, 1991, issued vide SRO 58 of 1991 dated 01.02.1991. Under the said rules, the post of Junior Scale Stenographer was categorized as a Class-II category-C post carrying the pay scale of Rs. 5000–8000, with a promotional avenue to the post of P.A. to Commissioner/Senior Scale Stenographer (Class-I/Category-D post). 03. The aforementioned Recruitment Rules were subsequently amended vide SRO 285 of 2013 dated 05.06.2013. In terms of SRO 285 of 2013 dated 05.06.2013, the relevant entries in Schedule-II were substituted by the said amendment and the designation of “P.A. to Commissioner” was changed to “Senior Scale Stenographer,” and the method of recruitment to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer was prescribed as “100% by promotion from Class-II Category-C having not less than five years’ substantive service in that category”. 04. It is submitted that the final seniority list of Junior Scale Stenographers of the department be issued vide Order No. 225-FD of 2020 dated 17.08.2020 and respondent No. 1 figured at serial No. 3 in this list. The Junior Scale Stenographers senior to him and figuring at serial Nos. 1 and 2 of the seniority list already stood promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers vide Office Order No. 168/Adm of 2019 dated 28.05.2019. The respondent WP(C) No. 1273/2025 No. 1, therefore, was the next eligible candidate in the order of seniority for promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer. 05. The grievance of respondent No. 1 before the Tribunal was that although he had attained eligibility for promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer prior in time but despite being the senior most Junior Scale Stenographer in the Department, was not considered for the promotion. The vacancy for the post of senior scale stenographer became available in the year 2021. However, as per the promotion roster maintained under the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005, this vacancy fell at Roster Point No. 10 was earmarked for a candidate belonging to the Other Social Caste (OSC) category. 06. The only person considered against this reserved slot was respondent No. 2, who was ineligible for consideration under the category. Consequently, there was no eligible reserved category candidate available for promotion against the roster point. 07. The contention of respondent No. 1 in the OA was that as requisite OSC category certificate of respondent No. 2 had expired in September 2020 and thereafter the same was renewed. Consequently, in these circumstances, respondent No. 1 being the only eligible candidate entitled to promotion against the aforesaid post, requested the department to de- reserve the post in terms of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 11 of the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005, read with GAD Circular No. 10-JK(GAD) of 2021 dated 05.03.2021. 08. The respondent No. 1 also moved representations to the petitioners on 04.03.2021 and 26.05.2023, requesting that the promotional vacancy in WP(C) No. 1273/2025 the post of Senior Scale Stenographer at Roster Point No. 10 be treated as unreserved, in light of the non-availability of any eligible candidate belonging to the Other Social Caste (OSC) category for such promotion, and sought his consideration and promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer against the said vacancy being next in order of seniority. 09. The department despite convening DPC for other cadre in the years 2021, 2022 & 2023 consistently overlooked the case of respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1, aggrieved by the fact that his candidature for promotion was being overlooked in the Departmental Promotion Committees (DPCs) meetings convened in the years 2021, 2022, and 2023, approached the Tribunal seeking a direction to de-reserve the post of Senior Scale Stenographer reserved at Roster Point 10 under the Other Social Caste (OSC) category due to non-availability of eligible candidate and for promoting him to the post based on his seniority in consonance with the J&K Reservation Rules, 2002. 10. The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application at the admission stage by directing the petitioners to convene a DPC and consider the candidature of respondent No. 1 under rules and consider the candidature of the respondent for promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer, in light of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 11 of the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005, read with Circular No. 10-JK(GAD) of 2021 dated 05.03.2021. The Tribunal further directed that the exercise be completed within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and until the candidature of the applicant was considered, no other DPC for promotion of WP(C) No. 1273/2025 Ministerial/Executive Staff of the Excise & State Taxes Department, Jammu Division, was to be convened. 11. The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order of the Tribunal on the ground that, for considering the case of respondent No. 1 for promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer, the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) is required to undertake an exhaustive exercise and follow the procedure envisaged under the relevant rules and the circulars issued on the subject, which necessitates considerable time. It is contended that this is an exhaustive exercise and such an exercise cannot be completed within the timeframe of one month as directed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal, it is submitted, failed to appreciate the administrative exigencies faced by the petitioners. 12. It is further submitted that the impugned directions have also resulted in the stalling of promotion processes of a large number of employees in the concerned departments, till the claim of the petitioner is considered which would cause discontent and disruption amongst the employees. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has travelled beyond the pleadings put forth respondent No. 1, by giving specific time bound directions, as the same were not prayed for, thus impugned order dated 29.01.2025 is required to be set aside. 13. The grievance of the petitioners appears to be that the entire promotion process has been stalled due to the directions passed by the Tribunal and the timeline set for compliance is unreasonable. It is not the case of the petitioners that respondent No. 1 is ineligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer, nor have they WP(C) No. 1273/2025 contended that respondent No. 2 continues to be eligible under the OSC category, as there are apparently no pleadings to the effect that the requisite certificate has not been furnished till date. 14. The Tribunal, while disposing of the O.A., merely directed the respondents (petitioners herein) to conduct a DPC strictly in accordance with the rules, especially in light of the fact that respondent No. 1 had been overlooked for promotion in several DPCs convened during the years 2021, 2022, and 2023, which has caused prejudice to him. The petitioners were directed to consider the case of respondent No. 1 for promotion in terms of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 11 of the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005, read with Circular No. 10-JK(GAD) of 2021 dated 05.03.2021. The said exercise was directed to be completed within one month. 15. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 11 of the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005, pertains to the preparation of the select list for promotion. It lays down the procedure to be followed when there is a shortfall of eligible candidates from reserved categories. The relevant provision reads as under: “(4) If in the case of any of the aforesaid categories the number of eligible candidates belonging to such category in the third list fall short of the number of vacancies reserved for it, the remaining vacancies reserved for such category shall be treated as un-reserved and the selection authority shall prepare a fourth list containing the names of the candidates equal in number of remaining vacancies arranged in order of merit/seniority in the feeding cadre from out of the portion of the first list remaining after excluding the portion of the first list corresponding to the second and the third (hereinafter called fourth list). The fourth list added upto the second and the third lists shall in that event constitute the select List subject only to the provisions of sub-rule (5).” WP(C) No. 1273/2025 16. Circular No. 10-JK(GAD) of 2021, dated 05.03.2021, issued by the General Administration Department, provides for the preparation of the select list in accordance with the prescribed roster points and lays down detailed instructions to be strictly adhered to by the Departments while conducting promotions. Instruction No. 2, being relevant to the present case, is reproduced as under: “2. It shall be ensured that the vacancies roster points allocable to the reserved category candidates are kept vacant unfilled, unless no eligible candidate belonging to such reserved category to be considered against reserved slot is available, in which eventuality, the said roster point shall be treated as un-reserved, as provided under rule 11(4) of the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005 and utilized for promotion of candidate, next in the order of seniority, belonging to the general category. On the next occasion of conduct of DPCs, the succeeding un-reserved vacancy i.e., OM roster point shall be treated as reserved for that category, as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 5 read with Rule 11 of the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005;” 17. This Circular clarifies that vacancies reserved for reserved categories must remain unfilled unless no eligible candidate from that category is available, in which case the vacancy can be treated as un-reserved and filled by the general category candidate next in seniority. Accordingly, the respondents were bound to complete this exercise in 2021, upon receipt of representation moved by respondent No. 1 in accordance with the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005, read with Circular No. 10-JK(GAD) of 2021 dated 05.03.2021. 18. Be that as it may, the directions of the Tribunal to hold the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) in time bound manner on 29.01.2025, has been assailed nearly three months after the direction was issued, i.e., on 28.04.2025. WP(C) No. 1273/2025 19. The right of an employee to be considered for promotion is a fundamental aspect of public service and is protected under the constitution. This right cannot be disregarded only on the ground of administrative exigencies. The exercise of convening DPC is a routine administrative function and should be performed without any delay. The failure of the department cannot be an excuse for further delay. 20. The direction by the Tribunal was limited to the consideration of respondent No. 1’s case in accordance with rules, and the plea that its promotional process for other employees will be stalled is also unsustainable. 21. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, we find no legal infirmity or error in the impugned order dated 29.01.2025 passed by the Tribunal. 22. This petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. (Shahzad Azeem) (Sindhu Sharma) Judge Judge Srinagar: 30.08.2025 Michal Sharma/PS