Allowed

Gulshan Ahmad Makhdoomi v. State of Jk and Ors. (Transport Department)

J&K HC8 Dec 2021SWP/402/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed the writ petition on parity with a coordinate bench judgment quashing the Golden Hand Shake Scheme. The petitioner is directed for reinstatement or post-retirement benefits without interruption.

What did the court decide?

1. Petition allowed; impugned order quashed. 2. Respondents directed to process case for release of service benefits (reinstatement or post-retirement) with full emoluments as if uninterrupted service

Gulshan Ahmad Makhdoomi Vs State of Jk and Ors… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | J&K HC (2021)

¶1

S.No 24 After Notice Matters

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

SWP 402/2018

¶4

Gulshan Ahmad Makhdoomi

¶5

…Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through: Mr. Sheikh Younus, Adv.

V/s

State of JK & Ors.

…Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. Altaf Haqani, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Shakir Haqani, Adv.

¶11

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE. ORDER 08.12.2021

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case set up in this petition is fully covered by the judgment passed by this Court in a batch of petitions, lead case being SWP No. 1198/2009 titled Mohammad Shafi Ganai & Ors. v. State of JK and Ors.

¶13

It may be noted that vide judgment dated 16.04.2021 passed in the writ petitions supra, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has allowed identical writ petitions and quashed the Golden Hand Shake Scheme issued by respondent-Corporation vide Order No. 193/JKSRTC/MD of 2008 dated 21.10.2008 which is also impugned in this petition.

¶14

On the same analogy and on the parity of reasoning given in the aforesaid judgment, this petition too is allowed and the Golden Hand Shake Scheme promulgated by the Government vide impugned order is quashed. The respondents are directed to process the case of the petitioner for release of service benefits; viz, reinstatement in service or post retiral service benefits, whichever applicable as per the status he was having in the respondent Corporation prior to passing of the impugned order dated 21.10.2008. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be entitled to all service emoluments/benefits under rules notionally as if he has continued in service without any interruption

¶15

and monetarily from the date he is taken back in service by the respondents/his actual date of retirement.

¶16

The respondents shall be at liberty to take back the amount received by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned order after due calculation and identification or adjust the same towards the amount(s) due to the petitioner on his reinstatement in service, as aforesaid.

¶17

The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶18

(SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE

¶19

SRINAGAR

¶20

08.12.2021 Amir

Gulshan Ahmad Makhdoomi v. State of Jk and Ors. (Transport Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulshan Ahmad Makhdoomi v. State of Jk and Ors. (Transport Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nasir Ahmad Bhat Vs State of Jk and Ors. (Home Department)

Bashir Ahmad Ganaie Vs Sameer Matoo and Ors. (Health and Medical Education Department)

Khadeeja Previous Name Virah Pal Kour and Anr. Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Home Department )

Manzoor Ahmad Reshi Vs State of Jk and Ors. (Housing and Urban Dev Department)

Skarma Dorjey Vs Social Welfare(State Government)

M/S Hassans Road Construction Co. Ltd. and Anr. Vs State of J and K and Ors. (Revenue)