Fill up Director Fisheries post from eligible officers: CAT directs Govt

Srinagar, Nov 8: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) Wednesday directed the government to fill up the post of Director Fisheries from the eligible officers in the department based on their seniority even as it said that the JKAS officer could not hold the post.

A bench of D S Mahra, Member (J) directed the government to fill up the post of Director Fisheries from the officers in the department based on their seniority and eligibility as per J&K Fisheries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2009, ruling that JKAS officer cannot hold the post contrary to the Rules.

The court held this while deciding a plea by an officiating Joint Director of Fisheries, Muhammad Manzoor Wani, who was aggrieved by the order dated December 30, 2022, by which
Muhammad Farooq Dar, JKAS, Special Secretary to Government, Agriculture Production Department was temporarily assigned the charge of Director, Fisheries.
Wani through his counsel Faizan Majid Bhat with Haseeb Banday had approached the tribunal with the contention that he was promoted to the post of Deputy Director Fisheries on November 29, 2013, and further promoted as Joint Director Fisheries on incharge basis on May 25, 2021.

Wani’s counsel argued that he was governed by the J&K Fisheries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2009, and thus was entitled to the post of Joint Director on a substantive basis on promotion and to the post of Director.
“Since no DPC was convened by the authorities, the applicant (Wani) was still working in the post of Joint Director on incharge basis. The applicant is eligible for the post of Director as well,” the counsel said.

“The post of Director Fisheries is to be filled up by selection from Class II (Joint Director) having Master of Fisheries Management or Master in Zoology with Ichthyology as a special subject from recognised university and having two years substantive service in that class as Joint Director,” the counsel argued. “The order dated December 30, 2022, violates the J&K Fisheries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2009 since the post of Director can be filled up only from the post of Joint Director in promotion having requisite qualification of two years’ service.”

In response to the petitioner’s submission, Mubashir Majid Malik, DAG representing the government said: “Since no one was eligible for promotion to the post of Director due to the stay granted by this tribunal, therefore as an interim measure a JKAS officer has been assigned the charge of Director till an eligible.”
After hearing the parties, the court said, “As of today the applicant is eligible for consideration to the post of Director as per J&K Fisheries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2009.”
The court noted that Wani was already working on incharge basis as a Joint Director since 2021 and due to inaction on the part of the government, he had not been appointed as a Joint Director on a substantive basis.

“He (Wani) has acquired the eligibility for consideration to the post of Director though on in-charge basis,” the court said.
Relying on the judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Ajit Singh versus the State of Punjab, the court said in the judgment, the apex court has held, “If a person who satisfies the eligibility and criteria for promotion but still is not considered for promotion, same shall be violative of his fundamental rights under Article 14 and 16 of the constitution.”

The tribunal asked the authorities to fill up within four weeks the post of Director from the eligible officers in the department based on their seniority as per J&K Fisheries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2009.

It also directed the authorities to convene a DPC and consider the applicant (Wani) for promotion to the post of Joint Director in a substantive capacity which he is holding on incharge basis.
“As the applicant (Wani) is also from a feeding cadre, he is entitled to promotion to the post of Director and the same shall be done notwithstanding the complaint filed against the applicant,” the court said.