UT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS JAL SHAKTI DEPARTMENT v. NASEER AHMED TRAK
WP(C)/2183/2025 · 2025-08-11
Sanjay Parihar, Sanjeev Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4151 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4151 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 2183/2025 CAV No. 788/2025
UT of J & K & Ors. .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
v/s Naseer Ahmed Trak .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. F.A. Natnoo, Advocate
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER 11.08.2025
CAV No. 788/2025 Heard learned counsel for the caveator. Caveat stands discharged.
WP (C) No. 2183/2025
1. In this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging an order and judgment dated 19.12.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) in OA No. 1554/2023 titled “Naseer Ahmed Trak vs. UT of J & K and Ors.”, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the OA of the respondent and issued directions in terms of its earlier judgment passed in OA No. 1284/2021 titled “Parveen Singh vs. UT of J & K and Ors”.
2.
Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that the Tribunal has not adjudicated on the issue whether the benefit of SRO 149 of
Sr. No. 37
WP (C) No. 2183/2025 CAV No. 788/2025 2
1973 was correctly given to the petitioners or not and proceeded on the assumption that it was granted erroneously, more particularly, when the respondent had specifically pleaded in the petition.
Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the Tribunal has proceeded on the assumption as if it was a case of wrong fixation of salary and has passed directions restraining the petitioners herein from to recovering the arrears and also from going ahead with the re-fixation in terms of the impugned order.
3. In view of the clear stand taken by the learned counsel for the respondent, this petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Tribunal to adjudicate the matter afresh inter alia on the issue of applicability of the SRO 149 of 1973 to the case of the respondent.
4. Parties to appear before the Tribunal on 22.09.2025.
(Sanjay Parihar)
(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Judge
JAMMU 11.08.2025 Manik