1 S. No. 01 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 1749/2021 CM(5833/2021) CM(7893/2024) MANZOOR AHMAD …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Shuja ul Haq, Advocate. Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy.AG with Ms. Nowbahar Khan, AC. CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE O R D E R 13.02.2025 (ORAL) 1. The petitioner herein has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking for the following reliefs: - a) By issuance of writ, one in the nature of mandamus, the respondents be commanded to pay legitimately earned salary to the petitioner w.e.f June 2020 till date and release all other benefits which are admissible under law and rules. b) By issuance of writ, order or direction, the respondents be commanded to allow the petitioner to continue to discharge his functions as I/C Public Relations Officer and also not to dislodge or replace the petitioner by any other contractual employee, in any manner whatsoever as same shall be in the interest of justice and equity 2. The case setup in the petition by the petitioner is that vide order No.700/2020 dated 30th of May 2020 issued by respondent 3 herein, the petitioner herein came to be engaged as a Public Relation Officer on contractual basis in the Srinagar Municipal Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’) initially for a period of one year, consequent to which order the petitioner herein joined his duties in the Corporation and started to discharge the same to the best satisfaction of the authorities of the Corporation. It is stated that vide communication dated 16th of November 2020 addressed by the Secretary of the Corporation, petitioner herein 2 came to be posted as a Public Relation Officer to the Mayor of the Corporation whereafter the petitioner continued to discharge his duties with zeal, zest, and dedication. It is next stated that while appointing the petitioner as Public Relation Officer initially in terms of order dated 30th of May 2020, it came to be provided therein the said order that administrative approval be obtained from the Administrative Department in this regard, in pursuance whereof the respondent 3 addressed a communication dated 18th of November 2020 to the Administrative Department respondent 1 herein seeking approval to the engagement of the petitioner as Public Relation Officer. It is further stated that in the letter dated 18th of November 2020, it came to be specifically provided that there is no sanctioned staff in the office of Mayor in the Corporation, the engagement of the petitioner, as such, got necessitated on contractual basis. It is next stated that despite the addressing of communication dated 16th of November 2020, the respondent 1 did not take any decision thereof, on one hand, and on the other hand, the respondent Corporation failed to pay any remuneration to the petitioner herein for performing of his duties and functions as Public Relation Officer. A further communication is stated to have been addressed by the Deputy Mayor of the Corporation to respondent 3 herein in this regard, certifying therein that the petitioner has satisfactorily discharged his duties as Public Relation Officer, and that his remuneration is not being paid to him as such, a request came to be made for release of the remuneration to the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner, upon failure of the respondents to pay him the remuneration for the duties discharged by him as Public Relation Officer, the petitioner repeatedly submitted representations before the respondent, which did not yield any result whereupon the petitioner approached this Court through the medium of instant petition. 3. Objections/reply to the petition have been filed by the respondents. 4. In the reply filed by respondents 2 to 5, it is being admitted that the petitioner came to be engaged as Public Relation Officer, owing to the 3 dearth of the staff in the office of Mayor of the Corporation, and that the petitioner discharged his duties pursuant to the order of his initial engagement in the office of Mayor, and subsequently to the office of Acting Mayor. It is also being admitted that the engagement of the petitioner as Public Relation Officer in the Corporation was ordered by respondent 3 herein, subject to the approval of the Administrative Department and that such approval was sought from time to time from the Administrative Department while addressing a communication dated 28th of October 2021 as well in this regard. 5. Respondent 1 in the reply filed to the petition though has admitted the engagement of the petitioner in the Corporation as Public Relation Officer in terms of order dated 30th of May 2020 yet, has stated that the approval sought to the engagement of the petitioner herein have had been declined in terms of letter dated 30th of December 2020. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Perusal of the record tends to show that the Administrative Department seemingly had been conveyed the denial of approval to the engagement of the petitioner by General Administration Department on 30th of December 2020 as is manifest from the Annexure I appended to the reply filed by respondent 1, although no decision in regard to grant or refusal have had been taken by the Administrative Department as had been sought by the Corporation. Further perusal of the record suggests that the Administrative Department has not at all adverted to the case of grant or refusal of approval in the case of the engagement of the petitioner and has not taken any decision thereof. Even nothing is forthcoming from the record available on the file that advice conveyed by the General Administration Department to the respondent 1 have had been conveyed to the Corporation at any point of time. Thus, respondent 1 herein under these circumstances, can safely be said to have abdicated his duty cast upon it by law and to convey a decision in the matter to the Corporation. 4 7. Since no decision has been taken by the Administrative Department either for grant of approval or refusal in regard to the engagement of the petitioner herein as Public Relation Officer in the Corporation, the only inescapable conclusion thus that could be drawn is that the respondent 1 herein has failed to take any decision in this regard, and to convey the same to the Corporation and such failure on the part of the respondent 1 in the matter cannot, but said to be unfair and unreasonable, and as such, respondents in general cannot deny the petitioner the remuneration for the services he has rendered as Public Relation Officer in the Corporation, more so in view of the admitted fact that the petitioner herein has, upon his engagement as Public Relation Officer in the Corporation, joined the Corporation, and the Corporation extracted his services as such from him without any remuneration which in law cannot be countenanced. 8. Viewed thus, for what has been observed, considered, and analysed hereinabove, the instant petition succeeds, as a consequence whereof the respondents are commanded to assess and release the remuneration in favour of the petitioner herein for the services he has rendered as Public Relation Officer in the Corporation, without any further delay, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before respondents. In the event of failure or delay in releasing the said remuneration in favour of the petitioner by the respondents within the aforesaid period, the petitioner shall, in that case, also be entitled to the interest at a rate of 7% per annum from the date the remuneration became due to him till the date of its actual payment. 9. Disposed of. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 13.02.2025 Ishaq Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether approved for reporting ? Yes/No