Serial No. 07 Regular Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM No. 2962/2023 in LPA No. 89/2023 Union Territory of J&K and Anr. … Appellant(s) Through: - Mr Waseem Gul, Government Advocate with Ms Nowbahar Khan, Assisting Counsel. V/s Shabir Ahmad Pir & Others. … Respondent(s) Through: - Mr Hakeem Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate. CORAM: Hon’ble Ms Justice Sindhu Sharma, Judge Hon’ble Mr Justice Shahzad Azeem, Judge (ORDER) 01.09.2025 CM No. 2962/2023: 01. By virtue of this application, the Applicants/ Appellants are seeking condonation of delay of 1566 days in filing the appeal against the Judgment dated December 06, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court [“the Writ Court”] in SWP No. 750/2010 titled ‘Shabir Ahmad Pir & Ors. v. State of J&K and Ors.’. 02. The application proceeds on the premise that, after obtaining a certified copy of aforesaid Judgment, the case was taken up with the Administrative Department vide letter dated March 09, 2019, whereafter, due to abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India, the necessary follow-up of the case could not be maintained for a considerable period of time. LPA No. 89/2023 CM No. 2962/2023 03. It is further stated that, subsequently, in the month of February/ March, 2020, the whole world, including the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir, was hit by COVID-19 pandemic and the Applicant/Appellant- Department, being directly associated/ mandated with prevention and control of the spread of COVID-19 pandemic, put its men and machinery to tackle and control the spread of COVID-19 Pandemic in the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir, as a result whereof, everything else took a back seat in the Department. 04. Thereafter, on August 26, 2022, the file was again processed for filing of appeal in the matter and, accordingly, vide communication No. DHSK/Legal/Bla-419/359 dated August 26, 2022, the Directorate of Health Services, Kashmir requested the Administrative Department for permission to assail the Judgment dated December 06, 2018. Accordingly, the matter is stated to have been considered by the Law Department and decision was taken to challenge the Judgment passed by the Writ Court by filing Letters Patent Appeal and sanction for the said purpose was given by the Law Department on September 12, 2022, whereupon, the Counsel for the Applicants/ Appellants took up the matter with the Department for providing the relevant record so that the appeal is drafted and filed before the Court. After receiving the relevant records, the Counsel took some days for drafting and filing of the appeal. 05. The Applicants/ Appellants have also taken the ground for condoning the delay that in view of the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated March 23, 2020 and April 27, 2021 by virtue of which the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while taking suo moto cognizance of the situation prevailing in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic, directed that the period of limitation in all the proceedings in respect of limitation prescribed under law whether condonable or not shall stand extended. LPA No. 89/2023 CM No. 2962/2023 06. Finally, the plea raised by the Applicants/ Appellants seeking condonation of delay revolves round the point that delay was due to circumstances beyond their control, however, the Applicants/ Appellants, all along, remained diligent and have pursued the matter promptly without any slackness on their part. 07. On the other hand, although, the Non-Applicants-Respondents were put to notice on May 24, 2023, however, despite opportunity having been granted to file Objections, but instead of filing the Objections to the application for condonation of delay, Mr Hakeem Suhail Ishtiaq, learned Counsel for the Non-Applicants-Respondents made a submission at Bar that the issue involved in the appeal has already been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled “The State of Jammu & Kashmir and Anr. v. Ramesh Kumar Tickoo and Ors.; Civil Appeal No. 8640 of 2014”, and as such, same was taken on record, consequently, Mr Waseem Gul, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants/ Appellants sought time to report instructions on the next date of hearing. 08. Accordingly, when the matter came up for consideration today on September 01, 2025, the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants/ Appellants made a statement at Bar that the issue has already been settled by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the above-referred Judgment arising out of the same advertisement notice, therefore, the same would govern the fate of the instant appeal as well. 09. On the other hand, Mr Hakeem Suhail Ishtiaq, learned Counsel for the Non-Applicants/ Respondents, while conceding to this proposition, also submitted that if the application for condoning the delay is allowed and the impugned Judgment under challenge is modified in terms of the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “The State of Jammu & Kashmir and Anr. v. Ramesh Kumar Tickoo and Ors.; Civil Appeal No. 8640 of 2014”, same would put finality to the litigation. LPA No. 89/2023 CM No. 2962/2023 10. Heard, considered and perused the record. 11. From the series of judgments dealing with the issue of limitation and condonation of delay, it has been well settled by now that a hyper-technical approach to limitation periods could defeat the purpose of justice, especially in cases involving public authorities. In this regard, be it noted that a liberal approach is warranted when the delay is not due to negligence or mala fide intent. 12. As we have discussed at length, the grounds taken by the Applicants/ Appellants for condonation of delay, as same makes it abundantly clear that it was only because of the circumstances beyond the control of the Applicants/ Appellants which led to the delay in filing the appeal, most importantly, when both the parties are at idem that the controversy involved in the appeal has been finally put to rest by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in this view of the matter, we deem it proper to put quietus to the instant litigation, as such, for the reasons stated in the application and submissions made at Bar, sufficient ground is made out for condoning the delay, therefore, delay in filing the appeal is, accordingly, condoned. 13. CM No. 2692/2023 shall stand disposed of on the above terms. 14. On the request of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, the main appeal is taken up on board for consideration. LPA No. 89/2023: 15. This intra Court appeal is directed against the Judgment dated December 06, 2018 passed by the Writ Court in the Writ Petition filed by the Writ Petitioners/ Respondents herein, being SWP No.750/2010 titled “Shabir Ahmad Pir & Ors. v. State of J&K and Ors.”, whereby the Writ Petition filed by the Respondents has been allowed on the following terms: “12. In the light of the principles of law laid down in various judgments as relied on by learned counsel for the LPA No. 89/2023 CM No. 2962/2023 petitioners, the petitioners have made out their case for grant of relief as sought in the instant petition. Accordingly, respondents are directed to fix the seniority of the petitioners notionally from the date when appointments were made under advertisement Notice No.5 of 1991 as per the merit position drawn by the Service Selection Board immediately below the last selected candidate who stood appointed/ selected in the process of selection (supra) and to give notionally the service benefits to them, which their counterparts have been given.” 16. As we have noted hereinabove that when the matter had come up for consideration on August 20, 2025, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents had produced copy of Judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 8640 of 2014 titled “The State of Jammu & Kashmir and Anr. v. Ramesh Kumar Tickoo and Ors.” and submitted that the controversy involved in this appeal has been set at rest by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Accordingly, Mr Waseem Gul, learned Government Advocate, had sought time to report instructions in the matter. 17. Today, when this matter came up for consideration, both the learned Counsel appearing for the parties have submitted that the present appeal may be disposed of in the light of the aforesaid Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. They submit that in case the Judgment under challenge before this Court is modified in terms of the aforesaid Judgment passed by the Apex Court, same will give quietus to the long-pending litigation. 18. As the learned Counsels appearing for the parties have consented for disposal of the instant appeal in the light of the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled “The State of Jammu & Kashmir and Anr. v. Ramesh Kumar Tickoo and Ors.; Civil Appeal No. 8640 of 2014”, therefore, it would be advantageous to take note of the relief granted to the parties by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said Judgment, which reads, thus: LPA No. 89/2023 CM No. 2962/2023 “9. Therefore, in such circumstances, we direct that the appointment of the respondents herein be treated in furtherance to the same selection process and seniority just after the candidates who were already appointed prior. Therefore, the seniority of the respondents herein be fixed at the bottom without disturbing the seniority to the appointees who were protected by the order dated 07.04.1998 of the High Court. 10. Accordingly, the direction issued in the impugned order to redraw the inter se seniority stands modified in above terms and the appellant(s) shall prepare the seniority list, but the direction to grant consequential benefits except back wages shall remain intact. 11. It is made clear here that by virtue of grant of such seniority, the respondents herein would be entitled to consequential benefits except back wages including the pensionary and retiral benefits. This appeal stands disposed of with the aforesaid modification in the impugned order.” 19. In order to understand the controversy on hand with precision and in brevity, it is suffice to place on record that the controversy on hand pertains to the selection/ appointment to the post of Medical Assistants (Pharmacists) initiated pursuant to advertisement notice No. 5 of 1991. In the first round of litigation, a number of Writ Petitions came to be filed, wherein directions were issued by the Court and, in compliance thereto, the Petitioners therein came to be appointed to the post of Medical Assistant (Pharmacist). Thereafter, the grouse was raised by virtue of different Writ Petitions for fixation of seniority and the matter on hand is also one of the off-shoots of those grievances regarding fixation of seniority and it is equally important to note that the Judgment placed on record by the learned Counsel for the Respondents, by which the controversy has been finally set at rest by Hon’ble Supreme Court, also governs the issue of seniority of the appointees in pursuance of advertisement notice No. 5 of 1991. 20. Therefore, in this backdrop, we also are of the view that if the Judgment under challenge is modified in terms of the aforesaid Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, same would further the cause of justice and put an end to the long-drawn litigation. LPA No. 89/2023 CM No. 2962/2023 21. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and in view of the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled “The State of Jammu & Kashmir and Anr. v. Ramesh Kumar Tickoo and Ors.; Civil Appeal No. 8640 of 2014”, the impugned Judgment stands modified in the following terms: “The appointment of the Respondents herein be treated in furtherance to the same selection process and seniority just after the candidates who were already appointed prior, as such, the seniority of the Respondents herein be fixed at the bottom, without disturbing the seniority of the appointees who were protected by Order dated April 07, 1998 of the High Court and they shall be granted the consequential benefits, including pensionary and retirement benefits, except back wages.” 22. The appeal shall stand disposed of with the aforesaid modification in the impugned Judgment. (Shahzad Azeem) (Sindhu Sharma) Judge Judge SRINAGAR September 1st, 2025 “TAHIR” Tahir Manzoor Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document