Central Administrative Tribunal
Mohd Ali vs D/o Forests Ut Of Jammu & Kashmir on 30 December 2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU
Hearing through video conferencing
T.A./61/9348/2020
This the 30th day of November, 2020
HON’BLE MR. RAKESH SAGAR JAIN, MEMBER (J)
1. Mohd. Ali S/o Kheir Din R/o Machhedi Kindly Tehsil Billawar District, age 41 years.
2. Kamal Kishore S/o Onkar Chand R/o Billawar Tehsil Billawar District Kathua, age 36 years.
........................Applicants
(Advocate: Ms.Surinder Kour)
Versus
1.
State of J&K through Chief Secretary, Government of Jammu &
Kashmir, Civil Secretariat Srinagar/Jammu.
2.
Commissioner /Secretary to Govt. Forest Department, Govt. Of Jammu & Kashmir, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/ Jammu.
3.
Principal
Chief
Conservator
of
Forest,
Govt.
Of
J&K,
Jammu/Srinagar.
4.
Conservator of Forest, Central Circle, Jammu.
5.
Project Officer, Divisional Forest Office RVP Thein Dam FD-II, Kathua.
6.
Range Officer, Thein Dam RVP Project, Basoli.
7.
Ram Pal S/o Krishan Chand R/.o Surora II Nagar, Kathua in the office of Range Officer, Thein Dam RVP Basoli.
...................Respondents
(Advocate:- Mr. Sudesh Magotra, DAG)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
[O R A L] Hon’ble Mr. Rakesh Sagar Jain, Member (J):
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents by not regularizing
:: 2 ::
their services on Class IV post on which the applicants are serving and to give similar treatment to the applicants as in given to the private respondent no.7 namely Mr.Ram Pal. He further submits that the applicants would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider their claims by treating this TA as representation of the applicants within a stipulate period of time.
2. Looking to the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants, the T.A. is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the applicants for regularization by treating this TA as representation of the applicants and pass a reasoned and speaking order and communicate the decision so taken to the applicants within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
3. It is made clear that I have not entered into the merits of the case.
4. No order as to cost.
(RAKESH SAGAR JAIN) MEMBER (J)
Ak/-