Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Dec 27: The State High Court today granted five weeks to Director General of Police S P Vaid for filing objections to the plea of Director General of Prisons challenging his eligibility for appointment of DGP Jammu and Kashmir.
The Division Bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice M K Hanjura granted the time to the counsel representing Vaid and Court said Ministry of Home Affairs shall also file the reply within the said period.
State has filed the reply in opposition to the petition of Misra. “Reply on behalf of respondent 2&3 filed. Rahul Sharma for Vaid seeks and is granted 5 weeks time to file the reply, same shall be done also by respondent 1”, DB said.
Petitioner S K Misra, who is presently holding the post of Director General Prisons J&K, and has challenged the eligibility of S P Vaid as Director General of Police, was also present in the Court at the time of hearing.
Misra is aggrieved of the order of Government whereby Vaid was selected and appointed as DGP of State and challenged the same before Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on the ground that the order of appointment of Vaid as DGP is in violation of Business Rules as also against the Supreme Court judgment.
He through his counsel Shuja-ul-Haq further submitted that the appointment has been issued without considering the other eligible candidates and also by selecting a person who was ineligible for being selected as DGP.
Misra further submitted that the present incumbent was only empanelled as Inspector General of Police by the Ministry of Home Affairs on the said date and was junior to him (petitioner).
Petitioner further added before the court that Principal Secretary to Home department while considering his representation in terms of CAT in violation of Business Rules and inconsistent reasoning rejected the claim of the petitioner vide order dated 23.2.17 which compelled him to challenge the same again before CAT.
CAT on April 2017 considered the case again and directed the DGP to restrain from exercising administrative control or power over the petitioner-Misra in any manner.
However, petitioner submitted that on September 2017, CAT in terms of judgment dismissed his plea without considering the entire material on record in its true and correct perspective and without appreciating the relevant law, rules and the ruling of Supreme Court in Prakash Sing Versus Union of India.
Petitioner along with other reliefs prayed that the decision of CAT passed on September 21 be quashed and subsequently the Government be directed to promote him to the post of DGP.
Petitioner alleged that since the authorities more particularly Chief Secretary and Principal Home Secretary have committed willful breach of law laid down by Apex Court in Prakash Singh’s case as such contempt proceedings be initiated against them so as to punish them under law.
It has also been submitted before DB that CAT not only erred in holding that the case of the petitioner along with present DGP was considered by the cabinet but has also fallen in grave error in holding that the directions passed by apex court were of directory in nature and not mandatory.
Follow our WhatsApp channel