Gh hassan malik vs Er rakesh kumer gupta chif engineer jalshakti

Court
Central Administrative Tribunal

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR
Order Sheet
Item no.:   10
M.A./1246/2026 (SRINAGAR)
[ MA for Disposal ]
[ SENIOR CITIZEN ]
In
O.A./816/2024
C.P./362/2025
Court No.: 1
No of Adjournment: 2
Order Dated: 21/10/2026
GH HASSAN MALIK
Vs
JAL SHAKTI DEPARTMENT
For Applicant(s) Advocate : MR. M A BEIGH
For Respondent(s) Advocate : MR. RAIS UD DIN GANAIE, DAG
  Notes of The Registry     Order of The Tribunal
 
1. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed the present
M.A. No. 1246/2026 in C.P. No. 362/2025, seeking
appropriate directions for release/refund of the amount
recovered or withheld from the applicant pursuant to the
pay fixation/upgradation under SRO 59 of 1990. It is
submitted that the applicant had filed O.A. No. 816/2024
before this Tribunal, which was disposed of vide
judgment dated 30.04.2025. The said judgment was not
challenged by the respondents; however, the same has
not been implemented, constraining the applicant to
initiate the present Contempt Petition. It is further
submitted that notice has already been issued to the
respondents/contemnors, but no statement of facts has
been filed till date.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that
similarly situated employees of the same department
were granted relief by this Tribunal in O.A. Nos.
818/2024, 882/2024, 928/2024, 934/2024 and 938/2024.
The judgments passed in the said matters were
challenged by the authorities before the Hon’ble High
Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar in
WP(C) Nos. 3271/2025, 3273/2025, 3274/2025,
3276/2025 and 3277/2025, which were disposed of vide
orders dated 27.12.2025, with the consent of the parties,
in the light of the judgments passed in Union Territory
of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. v. Deshbir Singh, LPA
No. 119/2022, CM No. 6546/2022, decided on
22.09.2023, and Sita Ram & Ors. v. Union Territory of
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Devendra Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.22 15:35:14+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

Jammu & Kashmir & Ors., WP(C) No. 2416/2024 ,
decided on 04.04.2025. It is submitted that the Hon’ble
High Court directed the release of the recovered amounts
in favour of the concerned employees within the
stipulated period. Copies of the aforesaid judgments have
been annexed with the application.
3. It is further submitted that the aforesaid judgments have
been implemented and acted upon and that, in view
thereof, the applicant is also entitled to the release/refund
of the amount recovered from him. It is clarified that,
although the applicant is already receiving pension
without the benefit of SRO 59 of 1990 and does not
press his claim for the benefit of SRO 59 of 1990 in the
present proceedings.
4. However, after arguing the matter for some time, learned
counsel for the applicant confine his claim to the extent
of release/refund of the amount recovered pursuant to the
pay fixation/upgradation under SRO 59 of 1990, in the
light of the judgments passed in Sita Ram & Others v.
Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Others,
decided on 04.04.2025, and Jammu & Kashmir &
Others v. Maqbool Sheikh & Others, WP(C) No.
936/2025 , decided on 06.03.2026.
5. The statement made by learned counsel for the applicant
at the Bar is taken on record.
6. Mr. Rais Ud Din Ganaie, learned Deputy Advocate
General appearing for the respondents/contemnors,
submits that the respondents also rely upon the
judgments rendered in Sita Ram & Others v. Union
Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Others, decided on
04.04.2025; Deshbir Singh v. Union Territory of J&K
& Others, WP(C) No. 1730/2020 (O&M) c/w CCP(S)
No. 32/2021, decided on 02.06.2022; and Jammu &
Kashmir & Others v. Maqbool Sheikh & Others,
WP(C) No. 936/2025 , decided on 06.03.2026,
particularly with regard to the competence of the
department to correct an erroneous pay fixation and the
consequential action permissible under the applicable
rules. He submits that the applicant’s claim may be
examined in the light of the aforesaid judgments and the
applicable rules. He further submits that the present
M.A. may be disposed of and the Contempt Petition
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Devendra Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.22 15:35:14+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

closed with appropriate directions, without prejudice to
the rights and contentions of the respondents. His
statement made is taken on record.
7. Having considered the submissions made at the Bar and
perused the material placed on record, this Tribunal is of
the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be
served by keeping the present M.A. and the Contempt
Petition pending, particularly in view of the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties and the proposed
course for consideration of the applicant’s claim in
accordance with the applicable rules and the judgments
relied upon.
8. Accordingly, the present M.A. No. 1246/2026 is
disposed of, and Contempt Petition No. 362/2025 is
closed with a direction to the respondents/contemnors to
consider the applicant’s claim for release/refund of the
amount recovered from him pursuant to the pay
fixation/upgradation under SRO 59 of 1990, in the light
of the judgments passed in Sita Ram & Others v. Union
Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Others, decided on
04.04.2025 , and Jammu & Kashmir & Others v.
Maqbool Sheikh & Others, WP(C) No. 936/2025,
decided on 06.03.2026, if the applicant is found to be
similarly situated and squarely covered by the principles
laid down therein. The claim shall be considered strictly
in accordance with the applicable rules and law, subject
to the applicant’s eligibility and entitlement and there
being no legal impediment thereto, and an appropriate
decision shall be taken accordingly.
9. With the aforesaid directions, M.A. No. 1246/2026
stands disposed of and Contempt Petition No.
362/2025 stands closed . The contemnors are
accordingly discharged. Pending miscellaneous
application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
10. No order as to costs.
11. Registry shall consign the record to the Record Room
after due compliance.
   PRASANT KUMAR
   MEMBER (A)
JUSTICE RITU TAGORE
MEMBER (J)
Devendra Tripathi
( steno 'd' )
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Devendra Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.22 15:35:14+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi

Case No M.A./1246/2026 Srinagar Bench
List In: Main causelist             Item No. 10
Generated by DT CAT Central Administrative Tribunal Srinagar Bench on 21/10/2026
 
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Devendra Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.10.22 15:35:14+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Tripathi