IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. SWP no. 1174 of 2005 Girja Raina Petitioners State and ors Respondent !Ms. Anita Tickoo, Advocate. ^MrVinod Bakshi, Dy. A.G. MR. JUSTICE J.P.SINGH, JUDGE. Date: 19/02/2009 : J U D G M E N T :
1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing Forest
Order No. 27 of 2005 dated July 23, 2005 whereby she was
reverted to her parent department to work as Junior Assistant
with the Director, Department of Social Forestry.
2. The case set up by the petitioner in her writ petition is
that, having been promoted as Senior Assistant and allowed
to work as in-charge Head Clerk with the Director
Department of Social Forestry, she had acquired a right to the
promotional post and the order impugned in the writ petition,
reverting the petitioner as Junior Assistant, a post inferior to
the one which she had held earlier in the borrowing
department, was bad in law.
2
3. Justifying the order impugned in the writ petition,
respondents have submitted that the petitioner had been
allowed to work as in-charge Senior Assistant in a Centrally
sponsored scheme in the erstwhile Social Forestry Project
and on the closure of the project by the Government of India,
the petitioner was repatriated to her parent department as
Junior Assistant, the substantive post which she was holding
and her working as in-charge senior Assistant in the project,
would not give her any right to promotion as Senior
Assistant.
4. I have considered the submissions of learned for the
parties and perused the documents placed on the records.
5. Perusal of the documents on records indicates that
petitioner had not earned any promotion as such as Senior
Assistant, and in that view of the matter she cannot claim any
right against the post of Senior Assistant on her repatriation
to the parent department from the project where she is shown
to have been working as in-charge Head Clerk against
available post of Senior Assistant.
6. Petitioner’s adjustment as in-charge Head Clerk against
the post of a Senior Assistant on the strength of the project
during the period of her posting in the Social Forestry
Project, would not give her any right to the post available in
3
the cadre of the department where she had held her lien. With
the closure of the project, the superior position enjoyed by
the petitioner in the project, too would cease and in that view
of the matter her claim for getting the same position in her
parent department may not be tenable.
7. I, therefore, do not find any error in the impugned
order, reverting the petitioner to her parent department
against the post of Junior Assistant, which she substantively
holds in the Social Forestry Department.
8. The order impugned does not violate any enforceable
right of the petitioner. Her writ petition is thus without
substance, which is, accordingly, dismissed.
(J.P.Singh)
Judge
JAMMU:
19.02.2009
Anil Raina, Secy