CAT directs Govt to consider Senior Prosecutor’s promotion claim

Srinagar, Feb 4: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in Srinagar has directed the Government to examine the promotion claim of a senior-most Chief Prosecuting Officer, who alleged exclusion from a recent promotion order without assigning reasons.

A Division Bench of M S Latif, Member (Judicial) and Prasant Kumar, Member (Administrative) directed the government to treat as “representation” a plea by Sheikh Muzaffar Ahmad, a member of the J&K Prosecution Service, against a government order “superseding him without recording reasons”.

In his plea before the Tribunal, the senior most CPO had challenged the Government Order dated January 27, 2026 by which 18 officers were promoted as Deputy Directors Prosecution while he was “excluded”.

Ahmad’s contention was that as senior-most eligible officer, he figured at serial number 1 in the eligibility list purportedly circulated by the Director General of Prosecution in August 2025, and fulfilled all conditions for promotion since January 2024. He said that his exclusion, without assigning any reasons, was arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

In support of his contention, the aggrieved officer cited a Supreme Court’s decision wherein the apex court has held that “supersession of senior officer without recording reasons is impermissible in law, as it introduces arbitrariness and conveys an implicit condemnation of the officer’s suitability”. “Non-assigning of any reason makes the order stigmatic, as the applicant could not have been deprived of his right of consideration for his promotion coupled with the fact that when promotion increases efficiency of the public service and incidence of service,” the aggrieved officer said in his plea.

At the request of the officer’s counsel, the Tribunal refrained from adjudicating the merits of the promotion order and instead directed the authorities to treat Ahmad’s petition as a representation. “Ordinarily, before passing any order as prayed in the O.A. (Original Application—read plea), the private respondents (18 promoted officers) were to be heard in the matter, as no order could have been passed to the prejudice of the private respondents at their back,” the Tribunal said, adding, “However counsel for the applicant submits that he would be satisfied if the instant O.A. is disposed of by providing that the instant O.A. be treated as representation by the respondents and directing them to dispose of the same in accordance with law and by passing appropriate orders.” The CAT asked the authorities to consider and decide the representation within six weeks by passing a speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law. Moreover, it directed the authorities to provide Ahmad an opportunity of being heard, in keeping with the principles of natural justice.