Aijaz Ahmad Bhat vs RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

ITEM 02 1 OA 1157 OF 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

SRINAGAR BENCH, SRINAGAR
O.A. 1157/2026
st
Date of Order: 21 October, 2026
C O R A M
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER(JUDL.)
HON’BLE MR. PRASANT KUMAR, MEMBER(Admn.)

1. Aijaz Ahmad Bhat (Aged:54 years) S/o Ghulam
Mohammad Bhat R/o Karhama, Tangmarg. Pin-193404.
2. Bashir Ahmad Khanday (Aged:53 years) S/o Abdul
Karim Khanday R/o Ogmuna, Karhama, Tangmarg. Pin-
193404
3. Mohammad Aslam Khuroo (Aged:55 years) S/o
Ghulam Qadir Khuroo R/o Doabgah, Achabal, Sopore.
Pin-193404.
4. Mohammad Ashraf Dar (Aged:55 years) S/o Abdul
Gani Dar R/o Ganjipora, Buran Pattan. Pin-193121.
5. Maheena Akhtar (Aged:57 years) D/o Ghulam
Mohammad R/o Chattabal, Srinagar Pin-190010
6. Mohammad Ashraf Bhat (Age: 54 years)! S/o Abdul
Ahad Bhat R/o Tapper Bala, Pattan, Baramulla 193121.

……Applicant
By Advocate :
Mr. Bilal A Malla
VERSUS
1. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir through through
Commissionary Secretary Rural Development and
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 2 OA 1157 OF 2026

Panchayati Raj Civil Secretariat Jammu/Srinagar-190001.
2. Director, Rural Development Department, Kashmir-
190001.
..….Respondents
By Advocate :-
Mr. Satinder Singh, AAG

O R D E R (ORAL)

JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER [JUDL.]

01. At the outset, it is noticed from the record that the
applicants have filed MA No. 1408/2026 seeking
permission to file a joint Original Application. For the
reasons stated therein, the said application is allowed.
02. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant
No. 1, who possesses the qualification of 10+2, was
engaged as a Daily Rated Worker in the year 1992 and
was subsequently regularized vide Government Order No.
249-RD&PR of 2019 dated 09.05.2019. Applicant No. 2
also possesses the qualification of 10+2 from the Jammu
and Kashmir Board of School Education and was
regularized pursuant to the aforesaid Government Order.
Applicant No. 3, who was also engaged as a Daily Rated
Worker in the respondent department, was similarly
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 3 OA 1157 OF 2026

regularized pursuant to the same Government Order.
Applicants Nos. 4 and 5, possessing the requisite
qualifications, were regularized against the posts of
Helpers, whereas applicant No. 6, who possesses the
qualification of Matriculation, was regularized by the
competent authority vide Order No. 204-DRDK of 2000
dated 04.08.2000. Copies of the relevant regularization
orders and qualification certificates have been annexed
with the Original Application.
03.
Learned counsel further submits that the respondents
have, from time to time, sought service particulars of
Helpers working in various Block Development Offices
through the concerned Assistant Development
Commissioners and Block Development Officers for
consideration of the issue of redesignation. The applicants
contend that they have been continuing against the posts
of Helpers for a considerable period and were under the
legitimate expectation that their designations would also
be changed and corresponding service benefits extended
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 4 OA 1157 OF 2026

to them, in line with the treatment accorded to similarly
situated employees.
04. It is submitted that Government Order No. 70-RD&PR of
2014 dated 27.02.2014 accorded sanction for
redesignation of 945 Helpers of the Rural Development
Department as Plantation Supervisors, Plantation
Watchers, Malis, Orderlies and Chowkidars. However, the
aforesaid Government Order was kept in abeyance vide
Government Order No. 190-RD&PR of 2014 dated
18.06.2014, pending an enquiry into the alleged
misconduct of certain officials in connection with the
redesignation exercise.
05. Learned counsel submits that certain employees,
aggrieved by the decision to keep the redesignation order
in abeyance, approached the Hon’ble High Court of
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh by filing SWP No.
1280/2014. Vide order dated 10.08.2017, the Hon’ble
High Court took note of the constitution of a committee to
review the issue of redesignation in terms of Government
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 5 OA 1157 OF 2026

Order No. 213-RD&PR of 2017 dated 27.07.2017 and
directed the committee to proceed with the redesignation
exercise, subject to verification of the genuineness of the
certificates of the concerned Helpers and consideration of
consequential benefits in terms of Government Order No.
70-RD&PR of 2014 dated 27.02.2014.
06. It is further submitted that the committee constituted to
review the issue examined the eligibility of the concerned
employees and recommended restoration of Government
Order No. 70-RD&PR of 2014 dated 27.02.2014.
Thereafter, certain employees, aggrieved by the alleged
failure of the respondents to give effect to the
recommendations of the committee, approached the
Hon’ble High Court by filing SWP No. 563/2019, which
was subsequently transferred to this Tribunal and
registered as T.A. No. 250/2022, titled Ghulam
Mohammad Bhat and Others v. State of Jammu and
Kashmir and Others.
07. Learned counsel submits that T.A. No. 250/2022 came up
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 6 OA 1157 OF 2026

for consideration before this Tribunal on 31.07.2023,
when the claim for redesignation was considered in the
context of the benefit already extended to similarly
situated Helpers vide Government Order No. 372-JK
(RD&PR) of 2022 dated 01.12.2022. It is further
submitted that certain applicants in the aforesaid
proceedings initiated contempt proceedings seeking
implementation of the directions issued in the matter of
Ghulam Mohammad Bhat and Others v. State of Jammu
and Kashmir and Others. Pursuant to the subsequent
proceedings, 23 employees were redesignated against
various posts vide Government Order No. 445-JK
(RD&PR) of 2024 dated 22.11.2024, followed by a
corrigendum dated 03.02.2026.
08.
Learned counsel further submits that some of the
employees whose posts were redesignated have
subsequently been promoted to the posts of Panchayat
Secretaries. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon
Order No. 1812-ACDA of 2026 dated 20.02.2026. It is
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 7 OA 1157 OF 2026

also submitted that the respondents, vide communication
No. RDD/Estt/151/2022(207585) dated 17.02.2026,
sought detailed service particulars of Smt. Santoshi
Kumari, who had been redesignated as Plantation Watcher
and regularized vide Order No. 102-DRDK of 2000 dated
08.06.2000, for consideration of her promotion.
09. According to learned counsel, the aforesaid developments
demonstrate that the benefit of redesignation has been
extended to similarly situated employees and that such
redesignation has also had a bearing on their subsequent
service progression and promotional avenues. The
applicants contend that, despite their repeated
representations, the respondents have not considered their
claims for redesignation, thereby depriving them of the
service benefits available to similarly situated employees.
10. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants seek
parity with the employees who have been granted the
benefit of redesignation under Government Order No. 70-
RD&PR of 2014 dated 27.02.2014 and Government Order
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 8 OA 1157 OF 2026

No. 445-JK (RD&PR) of 2024 dated 22.11.2024, read
with the corrigendum dated 03.02.2026. They also seek
consequential service benefits, including retrospective
benefits or benefits from the date on which similarly
situated employees were granted such benefits.
11. It is contended that the continued retention of the
applicants against the posts of Helpers, while similarly
situated employees have been redesignated and have
become eligible for further service benefits in accordance
with the applicable rules, amounts to discriminatory
treatment. Learned counsel submits that such differential
treatment is contrary to the principles of equality and
equal opportunity in public employment enshrined in
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
12.
Reliance is also placed upon the order dated 10.03.2026
passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 175/2026, titled
Irshad Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir and Another, whereby the respondents were
directed to consider the claim of the applicants therein for
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 9 OA 1157 OF 2026

change of designation in light of the order dated
15.03.2019 passed in the matter of Ghulam Mohammad
Bhat and Others v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and
Others. A copy of the aforesaid order has been annexed
with the present Original Application as Annexure A-6.
13. However, after arguing the matter for some time, learned
counsel for the applicants submits that the ends of justice
would be adequately served if the present Original
Application is disposed of with a direction to the
respondents to treat the same as a representation and
consider the applicants’ claims for redesignation of their
respective posts and grant of consequential service
benefits, including the benefits claimed retrospectively or
from the date on which similarly situated employees were
granted such benefits, in light of the aforesaid order dated
10.03.2026 passed in O.A. No. 175/2026 and the
documents annexed to the Original Application, in
accordance with law.
14. Mr. Satinder Singh, learned Additional Advocate General,
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 10 OA 1157 OF 2026

appearing on behalf of the respondents pursuant to the
advance notice served by learned counsel for the
applicants, submits that the present Original Application
may be disposed of with appropriate directions, without
prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents.
15. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
16. Having considered the submissions made at the Bar and
the material placed on record, this Tribunal is of the
considered opinion that no useful purpose would be
served by keeping the present Original Application
pending, particularly in view of the limited prayer made
on behalf of the applicants.
17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the controversy, the present Original Application
is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to treat
the same as a representation on behalf of the applicants
and consider their claims for redesignation of their
respective posts in terms of Government Order No. 70-
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 11 OA 1157 OF 2026

RD&PR of 2014 dated 27.02.2014 and Government Order
No. 445-JK (RD&PR) of 2024 dated 22.11.2024, read
with the corrigendum dated 03.02.2026, as well as their
claims for grant of consequential service benefits,
including retrospective benefits or benefits from the date
on which similarly situated employees were extended
such benefits.
18. While considering the aforesaid claims, the respondents
shall take into consideration the order dated 10.03.2026
passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 175/2026, titled
Irshad Ahmad Dar v. Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir and Another , a copy whereof is stated to have
been annexed as Annexure A-6 at pages 48–56 of the
present Original Application, along with the other
documents annexed thereto and the relevant Government
Orders and judicial directions referred to hereinabove.
19. The respondents shall examine whether the applicants are
similarly situated to the employees who have already been
granted the benefit of redesignation and whether their
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 12 OA 1157 OF 2026

individual cases are squarely covered by the aforesaid
Government Orders, judicial directions and applicable
service rules. Such consideration shall be undertaken
having regard to the respective service particulars,
qualifications, regularization orders, eligibility and
entitlement of each applicant. In the event the applicants
are found to be similarly situated and entitled to the
benefits claimed, and their cases are found to be squarely
covered by the applicable orders and law, the respondents
shall extend the admissible benefits to them, including
consequential service benefits, in accordance with law,
subject to fulfilment of the requisite conditions and there
being no legal impediment.
20. The respondents shall pass a detailed, reasoned and
speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the
date a certified copy of this order is served upon them.
21. It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any
opinion on the merits of the claims raised by the
applicants, and all questions of fact and law are left open
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1

ITEM 02 13 OA 1157 OF 2026

to be considered and decided by the competent authority
in accordance with law.
22. With the aforesaid directions, the Original Application
stands disposed of. Consequently, all connected
miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
23. No order as to costs.
24. The Registry shall consign the file to the Record Room
after due compliance.


PRASANT KUMAR (JUSTICE RITU TAGORE)
Member(Admn.) Member(Judl.)


21-10-2026
DEVENDRA TRIPATHI




Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
DN: CN=Devendra Tripathi, [email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Devendra Tripathi
Date: 2026.10.22 12:49:38+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.1.1