Central Administrative Tribunal
Amarjeet singh vs EDUCATION on 4 November 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR
Order Sheet
Item no.: 13
O.A./632/2024 (SRINAGAR)
[ BENEFITS OF SERVICE ]
[ SENIOR CITIZEN ]
With
M.A./794/2024
Court No.: 2
No of Adjournment: 11
Order Dated: 04/11/2026
AMARJEET SINGH
Vs
EDUCATION
For Applicant(s) Advocate : MR. ONKAR SINGH
For Respondent(s) Advocate : MR. SATINDER SINGH, AAG
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. The case invoves an order passed by the Directorate of School Education Kashmir dated 18.12.2023. Challenge has been thrown to the order on various grounds as have been urged in the O.A.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that prior to the filing of the instant O.A., the applicant had filed a petition before the Hon'ble High Court of J&K bearing No. 1201/2006 which came to be disposed of on 21.02.2017 with certain directions. He further submits that the applicant had even preferred a Contempt Petition before the Hon'ble High Court which also came to be disposed of by virtue of the Order dated 22.12.2023. He submits that the Hon'ble High Court of J&K has already in the above referred order observed, "The order dated 18.12.2023 prima facie reveals that the same has been issued without application of mind by the respondents/contemnors and without considering the matter in its true and correct prospect".
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it was only in the contempt proceedings that the applicant came to know that the order impugned has been passed.
4. This Court would also have no hesitation in prima facie observing that the order impugned has been passed without application of mind by the respondents and without considering the matter in its true and correct perspective, and not in accordance with law, given the facts and circumstances. In the earlier order, Zonal Education Officer, Waghoora, was ordered to be present in person.
5. Today, the ZEO Waghoora, namely, Mr. Ghulam Qasim Mir, is present in person before this Court. He does not seem to be aware of the facts of the case nor there is any record available with him, and whatever record he has produced, this Court is not satisfied with the same.
6. Mr. Ghulam Qasim Mir, submits that he has recently joined as ZEO Waghoora.
7. The case involves the livelihood of the applicant, as such, deserves disposal with promptitude. In absence of any record or material to substantiate the impugned order, I deem it expedient in the interest of justice to seek the presence of the Chief Education Officer, Baramulla, in the first instance along with all the record pertaining to the case whatever available in original along with the ZEO Waghoora.
8. Seeking the presence of the Chief Education Officer and the Zonal Education Officer is only to facilitate the just disposal of the case and to seek their assistance so that the case is resolved at the earliest.
9. List before Division Bench on 14.12.2026. M. S. Latif Member (J) Abhishek Punia ( court master )