GHULAM MOHAMMAD DAR vs HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

[1]
OA 1197/2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SRINAGAR BENCH, SRINAGAR
O.A 1197/2026
th
28 October , 2026
C O R A M
HON’BLE MR. M.S. LATIF, MEMBER (JUDL.)

Ghulam Mohammad Dar,
S/o Ghulam Qadir Dar,
R/o 122, Zabarwan Colony,
Hyderpora, Srinagar, J&K.
…..... Applicant/s

By Advocate Mr. Sheikh Mushtaq via virtual mode
:

VERSUS
1. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir,
through its Chief Secretary,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar.
2. Principal Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar.
3. Commissioner, Srinagar Municipal Corporation,
Srinagar.
4. Financial Commissioner/Administrative Secretary,
Finance Department, Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar.
5. Director, Urban Local Bodies, Kashmir, Srinagar.

…….Respondent/s

By Advocate : Mr. Furqan Sofi – GA

O R D E R
TARIQ A
2026.10.30 11:02:15+05'30'
TARIQ A MOTA
CN=TARIQ A MOTA, E=
[email protected]
I am the author of this document
MOTA

M.S.LATIF, M (J) oral
01/ Through the medium of this petition, the petitioner has, inter
alia, sought the following relief :
“The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the

respondents to consider his representations and preserve the
1

[2]
OA 1197/2026
relevant original records and refrain from treating any disputed
service entry as finally settled without examination of the
applicant's claim. The petitioner has further sought a direction,
as an interim measure, that in view of the facts and grounds of
the case, the court may be pleased to call for the records relating
to Government Order No. 181-HUD of 2007 dated 01.06.2007,
Government Order No. 196-HUD of 2018 dated 07.07.2018, the
subsequent posting and service orders, and the departmental
consideration of the allegations concerning his engineering
degree certificate and the respondents be further directed to
determine, in accordance with the applicable service rules and the
operative terms of the reinstatement order, the treatment of the
period from 01.06.2007 until his reinstatement, including whether
the period is to be treated as duty, qualifying service or otherwise
for the purposes permitted by law and direct the respondents to
determine his entitlement to salary arrears and other admissible
monetary benefits for the aforesaid period, after considering the
criminal court judgment, the subsequent departmental findings,
the reinstatement order and all relevant service rules.”.
02/ What can be gathered from a cursory look into the
pleadings made in this petition is that the petitioner is a retired
employee of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation, who was
appointed in the year 1991 and subsequently promoted to higher
engineering posts in the service of the respondents. It is submitted
that during his active service, some allegations were raised regarding
the genuineness of his engineering degree certificate, and
accordingly, departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings
were initiated against him which culminated in issuance of
Government Order No. 181-HUD of 2007 dated 01.06.2007, in
terms whereof, the petitioner was removed from service.
TARIQ A
2026.10.30 11:02:15+05'30'
03/ Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner challenged
TARIQ A MOTA
CN=TARIQ A MOTA, E=
[email protected]
I am the author of this document
MOTA
the adverse action aforesaid and pursued the proceedings arising
from the allegations. To this effect he referred to the judgment of
the competent criminal court dated 11.12.2013 and subsequent
departmental examination of the matter. It is further submitted that
the petitioner discharged his duties in the service of the respondents
2

[3]
OA 1197/2026
for several years. However, the allegations became the basis of
adverse administrative action as well as criminal proceedings, which
culminated in issuance of the impugned order bearing Government
Order No. 181-HUD of 2007-dated 01.06.2007 removing the
petitioner from service. Learned counsel submits that removal from
service had grave civil consequences, depriving the petitioner of the
opportunity to continue serving in his substantive service career and
badly affecting his financial security, service progression and future
retirement benefits. It is further submitted that the allegations
against the petitioner were thoroughly examined by the respondents
and, accordingly, criminal proceedings were initiated in relation to
the alleged use of a forged engineering degree certificate. He
submitted that the documents, forming part of the departmental
record, refer to a judgement of the competent criminal court dated
11-12-2013 and submitted that the findings recorded in the
subsequent departmental material also refer to the state of the
prosecution, evidence and the question of whether the alleged
certificate had been proved to be forged. However, the criminal
proceedings culminated in the acquittal of the petitioner.
04/ Learned counsel for the petitioner relies further upon the
subsequent departmental consideration of the matter, which
examined the material concerning the genuineness of his
TARIQ A
2026.10.30 11:02:15+05'30'
TARIQ A MOTA
CN=TARIQ A MOTA, E=
[email protected]
I am the author of this document
engineering degree and the sustainability of the allegations.
MOTA
Accordingly, it is submitted that in the light of the judicial outcome
and the subsequent departmental examination, the respondents were
required to determine the consequential action strictly in accordance
with law, as the action taken against the petitioner could not
continue to operate to his prejudice without a lawful and reasoned
3

[4]
OA 1197/2026
determination of its consequences after his reinstatement and the
respondents were required to consider the status of the intervening
period of the petitioner, his pay and service progression and the
resulting impact on his retirement benefits. It is submitted that after
reconsideration of the matter, the Government issued Order No.
196-HUD of 2018 dated 07.07.2018, whereby the applicant was
ordered to be reinstated in service and the petitioner has relied upon
its operative provisions, particularly those relating to reinstatement
and the determination of salary and other service benefits.
05/ Grievance of the petitioner is that the said reinstatement
order restored him to service, but the consequential monetary and
service benefits arising from the reinstatement have not been fully
extended to him and the petitioner has repeatedly sought a proper
determination of his entitlement, including the treatment of the
period during which he remained out of service pursuant to the order
dated 01.06.2007. However, learned counsel submits that claim of
the petitioner is not confined merely to reinstatement but also on
the lawful determination of his service record and the financial
consequences flowing from the impugned removal order, the
subsequent judicial and departmental proceedings, and the
reinstatement order. It is submitted that these matters ought to have
been examined comprehensively by the respondents instead of
TARIQ A
2026.10.30 11:02:15+05'30'
TARIQ A MOTA
CN=TARIQ A MOTA, E=
[email protected]
I am the author of this document
leaving the consequences of the intervening period unresolved. It is
MOTA
submitted that the petitioner was thereafter even transferred to
various places. However, the petitioner retired in the year 2023,
which made it, even otherwise, necessary for the respondents to
finalize his service book, pay fixation, qualifying service, pension
papers and all other admissible terminal benefits on the basis of the
4

[5]
OA 1197/2026
legally correct service position and the petitioner maintains that the
period affected by the removal order must be examined in the light
of the governing service rules, the operative terms of Government
Order No. 196-HUD of 2018 and the final outcome of the criminal
and departmental proceedings. The petitioner seeks a determination
as to whether the period is to be treated as duty, qualifying service or
otherwise, and whether the applicable rules entitle him to salary
arrears or other monetary benefits for that period.
06/ Be that as it may, after arguing the matter for a
considerable period of time, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly
submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if the respondents are
directed to treat this petition as comprehensive representation of the
petitioner and decide the same as expeditiously as possible in
accordance with law and in terms of order No. 196- HUD of 2018
dated 06-07-2018.
07/ Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that
he has no objection if the present O.A is disposed of with
appropriate directions, without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the respondents.
08/ Heard learned counsel for the parties at length, perused the
material available on record.
TARIQ A
2026.10.30 11:02:15+05'30'
TARIQ A MOTA
CN=TARIQ A MOTA, E=
[email protected]
I am the author of this document
09/ Having regard to the limited and innocuous prayer made by
MOTA
learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, the present O.A is disposed of
with a direction to the respondents to treat this petition together
with all documents and annexures appended thereto as well as the
representation, if any filed by the petitioner earlier, as a
5

[6]
OA 1197/2026
comprehensive representation and consider and decide the
averments put forth therein by passing a reasoned and speaking
order in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions, rules
and governing legal framework and in terms of Government order
NO. 196-HUD of 2018 dated 06-07-2018, having the effect of
reinstating the petitioner, of course, subject to his eligibility and
entitlement under law and provided there is no legal impediment in
doing so. The petitioner shall also be paid the wages if the aforesaid
order dated 06-07-2018 holds the field as on date. Needful to be
done within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of
this order and copy of this O.A is served upon the respondents.
10/ In the backdrop of what has been discussed above, this O.A
1197/2026 is disposed of along with connected M.As.
(M. S. LATIF)
Member (Judl.)
TARIQ MOTA
CONSULTANT (PS)
28-10-2026
TARIQ A
2026.10.30 11:02:15+05'30'
TARIQ A MOTA
CN=TARIQ A MOTA, E=
[email protected]
I am the author of this document
MOTA
6