Central Administrative Tribunal
DR MADIHA NIYAZ vs HEALTH AND MEDICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT on 5 November 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR
Order Sheet
Item no.: 19
O.A./1255/2026 (SRINAGAR)
[ CONTINUE ON THE POST ]
Court No.: 1
No of Adjournment:
Order Dated: 05/11/2026
DR MADIHA NIYAZ
Vs
HEALTH AND MEDICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
For Applicant(s) Advocate : BHAT FAYAZ AHMAD AND , SHAKIR RAJAB BHAT
For Respondent(s) Advocate : SYED MUSAIB, DY. AG
Order of The Tribunal
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.
1. Hon'ble Member (J) joined the proceedings through virtual mode.
2. Today, in the morning a mention was made by Shri Bhat Fayaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicants, indicating urgency in the matter. Accordingly, the matter has been listed in the supplementary list today.
3. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are aggrieved of the arbitrary and unjustified inaction on the part of the respondents, who have failed to accord extension in favour of the applicants, not-with-standing the fact that the applicants have already been recommended for extension by the concerned Head of the Department against the posts of Senior Residents in the Faculty of Biochemistry, Government Medical College, Baramulla.
4. He further submits that the respondents, instead of taking a decision on the recommendations so made and allowing the applicants to continue for the maximum permissible tenure of three years, have inexplicably kept the matter of extension pending and, in the meanwhile, proceeded to advertise the posts of Senior Residents in the Faculty of Biochemistry, Government Medical College, Baramulla.
5. He submits that the aforesaid action of the respondents is nothing but an attempt to replace the applicants by similarly situated candidates under an identical arrangement, without allowing them to avail the maximum tenure of three years to which they are entitled in terms of the applicable rules and conditions of engagement. The applicants, being aggrieved of such arbitrary, unreasonable and legally unsustainable action, have been left with no efficacious alternative except to invoke the jurisdiction of this Tribunal for protection of their legitimate rights and interests.
6. Mr. Syed Musaib, learned Dy. AG appears and submits that the applicants have not provided copy of the O.A to the respondents.
7. After arguing for a while, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that order passed in O.A No. 1239/2026, by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, may also be passed in the instant matter.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
9. Issue notice.
10. Mr. Syed Musaib, learned Dy. AG appeared and waived notice. He shall file detailed reply in the matter on or before the next date fixed.
11. List the matter for consideration on 16.12.2026.
12. In the meanwhile, the respondents shall consider the application for extention, submitted by the applicants before the Respondents, which is annexed with the instant O.A as annexure-4 at Page No. 33 to 38, and pass appropriate orders within a period of two weeks positively from today and for these two weeks the petitioners shall not be replaced by similar arrangement. Prasant Kumar Member (A) Justice Ritu Tagore Member (J) Jagdish ( ps consultant )