ASIF NAZIR vs HEALTH AND MEDICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT on 27 October 2026

1. Through the medium of the instant O.A., the applicant seeks the following reliefs:

a. Quashment the impugned suspension order issued by the Director Health Services Kashmir vide Order No. EsttSth/NG/4365-66 dated 30.07.2026 together with all consequential actions taken in pursuance thereof, being arbitrary and illegal, and directing the respondents to reinstate the applicant forthwith, release his entire withheld salary and treat the period of suspension as spent on duty for all intents and purposes with all consequential benefits.

b. Directing the respondents to decide the leave case of the applicant for grant of 60 days earned leave on medical grounds with effect from 12.06.2026 which stands endorsed and forwarded by the Chief Medical Officer Anantnag to the Director Health Services Kashmir vide communication dated 10.06.2026 forming, and also to regularise the casual leave availed by the applicant after the accident, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Tribunal, and till the applicant is reinstated to attach him in District Srinagar in the office of Chief Medical Office Srinagar, that is his original posting instead of District Anantnag as he holds a district cadre post of District Srinagar.

c. Directing the respondents not to initiate or proceed with any disciplinary proceedings against the applicant on account of alleged unauthorized absence from duty or on the basis of the show cause notice dated 04.06.2026, as the applicant never remained on unauthorized absence and had duly applied for leave before the competent authority as is evident from Annexure A-16, and directing the respondents to decide the pending representations of the applicant dated 03.08.2026, 06.08.2026 and 10.09.2026.

d. Any other order, writ or direction may also be issued in favour of the applicant and against the respondents which this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. What emerges from the pleadings made is that the applicant was initially appointed as a Class IV employee in the year 2009 and was later promoted as Junior Assistant. It is stated that the applicant holds a District Cadre post of District Srinagar, and was posted in the Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Srinagar. It is stated that the Director, Health Services Kashmir, vide Order dated 20.03.2026 deployed the applicant to the Directorate, and as stated, the said order was never served upon the applicant, and reached the Office of the CMO, Srinagar, on 23.03.2026, and on the same day, the applicant was placed under suspension for non-compliance with the earlier order.

3. The earlier order of suspension of the applicant is at Annexure A7 Page 54. Mr. Bhat Fayaz along with Mr. Shaqir Rajab, appearing for the applicant submits that the order of transfer issued was of 20.03.2026 and the order of suspension was issued on 23.03.2026, and submits that the 21-22.03.2026 were holidays in view of Eid and the latter date being a Sunday, reference to which has been made in the pleadings. They further submit that the earlier order of suspension was actuated by malice and the action of the Director was mala fide in law. However, they submit that the said order was thereafter reviewed and the applicant was reinstated and, after the reinstatement of the applicant, the applicant, who otherwise, while working in the Office of the CMO, Srinagar, was placed at the disposal of the CMO, Anantnag, for Shri Amarnath Ji Yatra 2026.

4. Thereafter, the applicant joined in pursuance of the orders of the Director, however, he suffered an accident and as a result, injured his leg and also developed a cervical issue. To this effect, he submits that the applicant presented himself before the Medical Board and the Medical Board substantiated the injury/ailment of the applicant. He submitted that the applicant has thereafter been representing before the respondents for sanction of sick leave and for extension of his leave, which has not been considered for whatever reasons. He submits, that leaving the decision on the leave there and then, yet another order of suspension has been issued on 30.07.2026 by virtue of which the applicant has yet again been placed under suspension with immediate effect in terms of sub- rule (1) of rule-31 of the J&K Civil Sservices (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956, and during the period of suspension, he has been ordered to be attached with the CMO, Anantnag. The applicant has challenged the impugned order on various grounds as mentioned in the O.A.

5. Mr. Bhat Fayaz submits that what was incumbent upon the competent authority was to first decide the leave case of the applicant in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, and resorting to the order impugned by placing the applicant yet again under suspension speaks volumes.

6. Undoubtedly, the competent authority is within its powers to place an employee under suspension, but resorting to placing an employee under suspension on the slightest provocation, and that too within a gap of six months, would not ordinarily be countenanced by law, coupled with the fact that when the order of suspension of a Government employee has to be a speaking order, it has to be shown by reference to the contemporaneous record that the appointing authority has given due thought and consideration to the matter and has come to the conclusion that prima facie a case of misconduct exists against the Government servant, which calls for a regular enquiry. To this effect, we are fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of J&K reported as Arshad Ahmad v. State of J&K, 1975 JKLR 331.

7. It is equally true that a subordinate officer is bound to adhere to the rules and regulations and the statute governing his employment, and it is equally the duty of the Head of the Department to maintain discipline and congenial atmosphere at the workplace. By no stretch of imagination can indiscipline be tolerated. But if any action has to be taken against an employee, the same has to be strictly in accordance with law and by adhering to the rules of natural justice.

8. It is also true that the main purpose of suspension is temporary, and it cannot be said to be a permanent feature. It is for this reason that there are guidelines issued by the competent authority providing that the period of suspension shall not be prolonged unnecessarily, and a provision for review has been incorporated in the Government orders and the guidelines attached to the Rule 31 of the CCA Rules. It is also true that frequent resort to suspension is not warranted, as it definitely affects morale in the service and puts an avoidable strain on the public exchequer by way of subsistence allowance for no work done.

9. Mr. Bhat Fayaz further submits that the applicant has already represented before the competent authority, in view of his ailment that his leave case be considered, but the same has not been done as on date.

10. Heard.

11. Issue notice. Mr. Syed Musaib, learned DAG, appears and accepts notice for the respondents, who shall file his response. In the meantime, subject to objections from the other side and till the objections are filed and considered, the respondents shall consider the case of the applicant for suitably attaching him at a place nearer to his home, in view of his ailment during his suspension period. It is made clear that notwithstanding the pendency of the O.A., the respondents can very well take a decision in the facts and circumstances of the case.

12. List on 02.11.2026.

Prasant Kumar Member (A) M. S. Latif Member (J) Abhishek Punia ( court master )