Early Times Report
Jammu, July 11: High court judge Janak Raj Kotwal today said the benefit of retrospective effect could not be granted to the petitioner who was selected in JKAP over a decade and a half back as a Sub-Inspector (SI).
The court directive came in a petition filed by one Arif Khan who was selected as SI in JKAP in 1999. The order of appointment was, however, not issued due to adverse character verification as he was found involved in a TADA case registered under FIR No 148/1990. He was arrested and detained under PSA. His detention was quashed by the court on April 2, 1992 in Habeas Corpus petition filed by him and he was acquitted in the criminal case on December 30, 1994 and later appointed.
The judge, while deciding the petition, observed that matter needed to be looked from another angle also. The petitioner could not have been appointed after his selection in 1990 due to adverse character verification because of his involvement and arrest in a criminal case under TADA and detention under PSA. Detention under PSA was quashed by this court and he was discharged of the criminal charge. His pppointment order came to be issued on March 9, 2002.
"It is thus clear that there had been no deliberate delay on the part of the respondents in issuing the appointment order after his acquittal. He seems to have felt satisfied with the issuance of appointment order though he again agitated the matter by filing a representation apparently somewhere in 2008. For all these reasons also, the benefit of retrospective effect cannot be granted and even equity is not in favour of the petitioner," Justice Kotwal said.
The court held that respondents, therefore, could not be said to have committed any illegality in refusing retrospective effect to the appointment of the petitioner nor a case for issuing writ in this regard was made out.
With these observations, the court dismissed the petition. |
