ZAINUL ABIDEEN RATHER v. STATE (NOW UT) OF J AND K AND ORS. (SCHOOL EDUCATION / SAINIK SCHOOL)
LPA/278/2024 · 2025-07-25
Sanjay Parihar, Sanjeev Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9251 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9251 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Serial No.03 REGULAR LIST
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
LPA 278/2024 in[SWP 2134/2014] ZAINUL ABIDEEN RATHER … Appellant(s) Through: Mr. M.A. Wani, Advocate Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy. AG CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDE R 25.07.2025
1. After arguing for a while, a short submission was made by Mr. M.A Wani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, is that though the writ Court has taken note of the fact that the appellant was paid the charge allowance for holding the higher post of Head Master @ Rs. 1200 per month in the year 2002, the pay revisions that took place from time to time have not been taken care of. 2. He submits that from the year 2002 until the appellant retired on superannuation in the year 2019, several pay revisions took place. As a result, there ought to have been an enhancement in the charge allowance. 3. We have gone through the impugned judgment and are of the view that the aforesaid aspect has not been considered. We are also of the view that the charge allowance which was fixed in the year 2002 could not have remained static and ought to have been revised in light of the pay revisions from time to time. Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 28.07.2025
4. In view of the aforesaid, we allow this appeal partially and direct the respondents to examine the issue in the light of pay revisions that took place from the year 2002 onwards till the superannuation of the appellant and accordingly revise the charge allowance payable to the appellant. The judgment of the writ Court is modified only to the aforesaid extent. 5. Let the exercise as directed above be taken by the respondents within a period two months from the date a copy of this judgment is served upon them. 6. Needless to say, in case the needful is not done within the aforesaid period and the entire arrears, to which the appellant is found entitled are not released, the amount payable shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of expiry of two months. 7. Disposed of.
(SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 25.07.2025
“ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 28.07.2025