rifat john vs University of Kashmir
- Court
- Central Administrative Tribunal
ITEM 14 1 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SRINAGAR BENCH, SRINAGAR
T.A. No: 109 of 2024
rd
Date of Order: This the 03 Day of September, 2026
C O R A M
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE,MEMBER(JUDL.)
HON’BLE MR. PRASANT KUMAR, MEMBERR (A)
Rifat John Aged 41 Years
D/O. Mohammad Shafi Parray
Resident of Chinni-Chowk Anantnag, Kashmir.
…… Applicant
By Advocate :
Mr. M Anis ul Islam for applicant.
VERSUS
1. University of Kashmir
through Registrar,
University of Kashmir,
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
Hazratbal Srinagar.
SHARMA
2. Assistant Registrar (Recruitment Cell)
University of Kashmir, Hazratbal, Srinagar.
…. Respondents
By Advocate :-
Mr.Asif Maqbool, Advocate for the respondents.
ITEM 14 2 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
O R D E R (ORAL)
JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER [JUDL.]
01. Through the medium of the present amended petition, the
applicant has sought, inter alia, the following reliefs-
A. By issuance of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ,
order or direction, the impugned decision of the Syndicate
taken by it in its meeting held on 29.07.2009 and also the order
dated 21.10.2015 whereby representation of the petitioner for
giving retrospective effect to her appointment has been
rejected, be quashed.
AND:
B. By issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, respondents be directed to give
retrospective effect to the appointment of the petitioner against
the post of Assistant Professor Botany with effect from
05.02.2007 i.e. when she was selected against the said post and
give her all the consequential benefits of her appointment
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
accordingly.
C. The Hon’ble court may pass any other order or direction which
it may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances
of the case.
02. The applicant pleaded that the respondent no.1 –
University, had invited applications for the post of
ITEM 14 3 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
Lecturer in Botany. Pursuant to advertisement Notice
dated 14.01.2004, the applicant, who possessed a M.Sc.
Degree in Environmental Botany and a Ph.D from Indian
Institute of Technology, Delhi, (IIT), besides having
qualified NET-JRF and GATE Examination, applied for
the post in question and participated in the selection
process. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that,
upon conclusion of the selection process, the applicant
was duly selected and figured at Sr. No.6 in the Select
List.
03.
It was, however, submitted that notwithstanding her
selection, the applicant was not issued an appointment
order, as the respondent no.1 – University deferred her
appointment on the ground that equivalence of the Degree
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
possessed by her was required to be examined. The
learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, whereas
other selected candidates, came to be appointed, the
applicant’s appointment was kept pending on the
aforesaid ground.
ITEM 14 4 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
04. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that,
aggrieved of the deferment of her appointment, the
applicant approached Hon’ble High Court by filing SWP
No. 607/2007, wherein the respondent no.1 – University
disclosed that the question concerning equivalence of the
applicant’s Degree was pending before the Syndicate. It
was submitted that taking note of the said position, the
Hon’ble High Court, vide order dated 25.11.2008 directed
the respondent – University to take a final decision
through its Syndicate on the question of equivalence
within a period of two weeks and further directed that, in
the event, the Syndicate granted equivalence to the
applicant’s Degree, the respondent University shall issue
an appointment order in her favour within a period of two
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
weeks. The said petition was accordingly, disposed of.
05. The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted
that the respondent- University, issued notification dated
19.07.2008, whereby notified that Equivalence Committee
of the University, in its meeting held on 04.06.2008 had
ITEM 14 5 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
recognized the M.Sc. Environmental Botany Degree
awarded by Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi as equivalent to
M.Sc. Botany Degree of University of Kashmir.
06. On the strength of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for
the applicant submitted that impediment which had earlier
stood in the way of the applicant’s appointment had
subsequently been removed, the respondent- University
ought to have proceeded to appoint the applicant even
before the passing of the order dated 25.11.2008 by the
Hon’ble High Court in SWP No. 607/2007. However, it is
contended that the respondent failed to process the
applicant’s case for appointment, thereby compelling the
applicant to institute contempt proceedings against the
respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
applicant that in the course of said proceedings the
respondents admitted the issuance of the notification,
recognizing the applicant’s Degree as equivalent to the
prescribed qualification for the post. However, the
respondents submitted that the post against which the
ITEM 14 6 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
applicant was to be appointed has ceased to exist/had
lapsed. At the same time, the respondents also stated that
the matter had been taken up with the government for
creation of post in question.
07. The learned counsel for the applicant further contended
that despite the assurance given by the respondents before
the Hon’ble Court, no appointment order was issued in
favor of the applicant, instead the respondents issued
another advertisement dated 18.03.2011, inviting
applications against four posts of Assistant Professors in
Botany. In view of the aforesaid development, the
applicant once again approached the Hon’ble High court
filing the petition (SWP No. 772/2011) and the Hon’ble
High Court passed certain directions vide order dated
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
18.04.2011. It is stated by the learned counsel, the
respondents thereafter, issued an appointment order dated
01.11.2011 in favor of the applicant, appointing her as
Assistant Professor in Department of Botany.
08. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted, that
ITEM 14 7 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
appointment was made only prospectively,
notwithstanding that applicant had been selected way back
on 05.02.2007 by Selection Committee, submitted a
representation seeking her appointment be given effect
from the date of her selection. The said request was
declined by the respondents, compelling the applicant to
approach the Hon’ble High Court of J&K by way of
present petition, which was subsequently transferred to
this Bench and was renumbered as T.A./109/2024.
09. After arguing the matter for some time, the learned counsel
for the applicant submitted that the applicant would be
satisfied, if the petition is disposed of with a time bound
directions to the respondents to give notional effect to her
appointment to the post of Assistant Professor, Botany from
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
the date i.e. 04.06.2008 on which Equivalence Committee
held its meeting and granted equivalence to the qualification
possessed by the applicant, and to extend her such
consequential/notional benefits as may be admissible for the
period intervening between 04.06.2008 and the date of her
formal joining pursuant to the appointment order 01.11.2011.
ITEM 14 8 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
10. The respondents entered appearance and filed their
response, resisting the claim of the applicant, stating claim
of the applicant are not maintainable as she was given the
appointment in 2011 upon creation of the post.
11. Mr. Asif Maqbool, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents, however, submitted that, subject to
applicable rules/regulations and other governing
provisions, and provided there is no other legal
impediment, the respondents shall consider and decide the
claim of the applicant, as projected by the learned counsel
for the applicant, within the time-frame stipulated by this
Tribunal.
12. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
considered the material available on record.
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
13. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel
for the parties, and having regard to the admitted position
that the applicant was duly selected pursuant to the
selection process undertaken by the respondents in
pursuance to the advertisement dated 14.01.2004 issued for
ITEM 14 9 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
the post in question and her name figured at Sr. No.6 in
the Select List, further that the Equivalence Committee of
the respondent - University had in its meeting held on
04.06.2008 recognized the Degree/qualification possessed
by the applicant as equivalent to the prescribed
qualification for the post in question. Subsequently, the
applicant was appointed as Assistant Professor, pursuant
to the appointment order dated 01.11.2011, we are of the
view that present petition can appropriately be disposed of
with a direction to the competent authority of the
respondents to consider the applicant’s claim in a time
bound manner for grant of notional effect to her
appointment and the consequential/notional service
benefits etc.
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
14. Accordingly, the competent authority of the respondents
shall consider and grant notional effect to her appointment
as Assistant Professor in Botany w.e.f. 04.06.2008 the
date on which the Equivalence Committee recognized the
qualification possessed by the applicant as equivalent to
ITEM 14 10 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
the prescribed qualification for the post in question, and
shall also consider the applicant’s claim for
consequential/notional benefits flowing therefrom, in
accordance with applicable rules and regulations.
15. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken and complied
within a period of six weeks. The decision so taken shall
be communicated to the applicant forthwith thereafter.
16. It is, however, made clear that for the period intervening
between 04.06.2008 and the date of applicants’
actual/formal joining pursuant to the appointment order
dated 01.11.2011, the applicant shall not be entitled to any
monetary benefits, the same being governed by the
principle of “No Work, No Pay” . The applicants’ claim
for notional benefits, shall, accordingly, be confined to
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA
such benefits as are legally admissible without involving
payment of salary or other monetary emoluments for the
said period.
17. It is further clarified that, while undertaking the aforesaid
exercise, the respondent shall not take into consideration
ITEM 14 11 T.A. No. 109 OF 2024
the communication/order dated 21.10.2015, subject of
course, to there being no other legal or factual impediment
in granting the notional benefits claimed and restricted
hereto by applicant which are otherwise admissible to her
as per law.
18. The petition is disposed of, in above terms with no order
as to costs.
19. The connected MAs., are accordingly, disposed of.
Consign the file to the Record Room after due
compliance.
(PRASANT KUMAR) (JUSTICE RITU TAGORE)
Member(Admn.) Member(Judl.)
03.09.2026
Jagdish/shubham
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHARMA
DN: CN=SHUBHAM SHARMA, O=CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=CAT
SRINAGAR BENCH, [email protected]
SHUBHAM
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: SRINAGAR BENCH
Date: 2026.09.07 16:41:30+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1
SHARMA