Saroj Bala vs SPORTS AND YOUTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT

:: 1 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

-CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU (RESERVED)

Hearing through video conferencing
Original Application No. 1237/2022
Reserved on: - 26.02.2026
Pronounced on: - 16.10.2026

HON’BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, MEMBER (A)


1. Saroj Bala Age 54 years W/o Jia Lal Sharma R/o Kothian Tehsil
Pouni District, Reasi 182311.
2. Kanchan Sharma Age 58 years W/o Sh. Ashok Kumar R/o Adarsh
Colony, Udhampur. 182101.
...Applicant
(By Advocate: - Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma)

VERSUS


1. Union Territory of J&K Through Principal Secretary to Govt. Youth
Services and sports department Civil Secretariat, Jammu-180001
2. Directorate of Youth Services and Sports MA Stadium Jammu-
180001 Ministry of youth Affairs and Sports
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 2 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

3. Gazanffer Ali Director, Youth Services and Sports J&K, MA
Stadium, Jammu-180001
4. Aijaz Ahmad Haji Section Officer in the office of Directorate of
Youth Services and Sports Jammu. 180001.
…official respondents
5. Tilak Raj Present post of posting HSS, Muthi, Jammu. 181205
6. Ram Rattan Present post of posting Hr. Sec. Baggan Zone Malhor,
Kathua- 184206.
7. Rakesh Kumar Present post of posting High Sec. School Chakra,
Zone Mahreen. kathua. 184101.
8. Ashok Kumar Present post of posting Higher Secondary School
Sohal Akhnoor. Jaшшп-181201
9. Subash Chander Present post of posting District youth Services and
Sports Office, Jammu. 1 80001
10. Kulbushan Kumar Present post of posting HS Koota Zone Hiranagar
Kathua 184101
11. Ramesh Chander C/o Director, Youth Services and Sports J&K, MA
Stadium, Jammu-180001
12. Uttam Singh Present post of posting Hr. Sec. School Chack kana
Zone Mahreen, Kathua.184101
13. Leena Kumar C/o Director, Youth Services and Sports J&K, MA
Stadium, Jammu-180001
14. Joginder Kumar Present post of posting Hr. Sec. School Koota Zone
Hiranagar. kathua, 184101.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 3 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

15. Sukdev C/o Director, Youth Services and Sports J&K,
Jammu.180001 MA Stadium, Jammu-180001
16. Ram Lal C/o Director, Youth Services and Sports J&K, MA
Stadium, Jammu-180001
17. Surjeet Singh Present post of posting Girls Hr. Sec. School
Nowshera, Rajouri, 185131.
18. Ram Murti Present post of posting District youth Service sports
Office, Jammu, 180001
19. Sudesh Kumari Present post of posting High School Seripanta,
incharge ZPEO Kot Bhalwal. Jammu, 181201
…Respondents.


(By Advocate: - Mr. Rajesh Thappa, ld. AAG, Mr. Manik Bhardwaj)










HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 4 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

ORDER
Per: - Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section
19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following
reliefs: -
a) allow the instant Original Application;
b) quash communications dated 28.04.2022 addressed by
respondent no. 2 to the applicants, whereby and whereunder,
the applicants have been reverted from the post of Incharge
Physical Education Masters to the post of Physical Education
Teachers after a period of almost 11 years, inasmuch as the
applicant no. 1 & 2 were promoted from the post of Physical
Education Teachers to the post of Physical Education Masters
on incharge basis in their own pay and grade with charge
allowance vide order No. DYSS/Estt/1978-2019 dated
05.06.2012 & order No. DYSS/Estt./7340-57 dated 21.10.2011
respectively;
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 5 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

c) direct the respondents more particularly respondent no. 1 & 2
to confirm and regularize the services of the applicant no. 1 &
2 as Physical Education Masters w.e.f. 05.06.2012 &
21.10.2011 respectively with all consequential benefits
including seniority, in-situ (non-functional) promotion;
d) direct the respondents to release the pay scale attached to the
post of Physical Education Master in favour of the applicant
no. 1 & 2 alongwith arrears w.e.f. 05.06.2012 & 21.10.2011
respectively, till formal order of promotion/regularization of
the applicants as physical education Master is passed by the
respondents
e) ANY other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;”
2. The applicants have filed the present Original Application under
Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, challenging the
communications dated 28.04.2022, whereby their placements as
Incharge Physical Education Masters were withdrawn and they were
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 6 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

reverted to the posts of Physical Education Teachers. The applicants
have also sought regularization of their services as Physical Education
Masters from the dates of their respective incharge promotions, along
with consequential service benefits.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants were initially
appointed as Physical Education Teachers in the Department of Youth
Services and Sports. In order to acquire the qualifications required for
promotion to the post of Physical Education Master, they applied for
permission to pursue higher studies through the proper departmental
channel. The Director, Youth Services and Sports, granted permission
to them to undergo BPE courses.
4. After acquiring the required qualifications, applicant No. 1, Saroj
Bala, was placed as Incharge Physical Education Master vide order
dated 05.06.2012, whereas applicant No. 2, Kanchan Sharma, was
similarly placed vide order dated 21.10.2011. According to the
applicants, they continued to discharge the duties of the higher posts
for almost eleven years. However, their placements were withdrawn
through the impugned communications dated 28.04.2022 on the
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 7 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

ground that permission to pursue higher studies had not been granted
by the competent authority.
5. The applicants contend that they had applied for permission through
the proper channel and that the permission was granted by the
Director, Youth Services and Sports, who was the head of the
Directorate. They submit that they cannot be made to suffer for an
irregularity committed by the departmental authorities. It is further
contended that several similarly situated employees were granted
regular promotions, whereas the applicants were reverted after serving
on the higher posts for many years.
6. The respondents, on the other hand, submit that the applicants had
acquired their higher qualifications without obtaining proper
permission and sanction of study leave from the competent authority.
It is stated that a committee constituted by the Administrative
Department examined the matter and found irregularities relating to
the grant of permission, leave availed and attendance during the
courses. On the basis of the committee’s recommendations, ex-post
facto approval was refused and the temporary incharge placements of
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 8 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

the applicants were withdrawn. The respondents maintain that the
applicants have no vested right to regular promotion merely because
they continued on the higher posts on an incharge basis.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully examined
the pleadings and material available on record.
8. The principal question which arises for our consideration is whether
the respondents were justified in withdrawing the incharge promotions
of the applicants after almost eleven years, particularly when the
applicants had pursued their higher studies on the basis of permission
granted by the Director, Youth Services and Sports.
9. At the outset, we find that the controversy involved in the present
Original Application is no longer res integra. An identical issue has
already been considered and decided by this Tribunal in O.A. No.
552/2022 titled Jatinder Singh & Others v. UT of J&K & Others ,
decided on 04.02.2026.
10. In the aforesaid case, the applicants were also serving as Incharge
Physical Education Masters and their placements had been withdrawn
through communications dated 28.04.2022 on the ground that the
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 9 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

permission granted for pursuing BPE/B.P.Ed. courses had not been
issued by the competent authority. The respondents had relied upon
the same departmental exercise and the decision refusing ex-post facto
approval.
11. After examining the matter in detail, this Tribunal held that employees
who had applied for permission through the proper departmental
channel and had acted upon permission granted by the departmental
authorities could not be made to suffer for administrative irregularities
for which they were not responsible. The Tribunal also considered the
long period during which the applicants had discharged the duties of
Physical Education Masters and the failure of the respondents to
afford them an opportunity of hearing before withdrawing their
placements.
12. The Tribunal further observed that the Department could not adopt
different standards for similarly situated employees. Where other
employees who had acquired qualifications under similar
circumstances were granted regularization, the cases of the applicants
could not be rejected without proper justification. The Tribunal
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 10 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

accordingly held that the impugned reversion communications were
arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the principles of natural
justice.
13. Consequently, O.A. No. 552/2022 was allowed vide judgment dated
04.02.2026. The communications dated 28.04.2022 and the enquiry
reports dated 11.01.2022 and 19.01.2022 were quashed. The
respondents were further directed to regularize the services of the
applicants as Physical Education Masters from the dates on which
they became entitled to promotion, together with consequential
benefits.
14. Coming to the present case, we find that the facts are substantially
identical. The applicants herein were also granted permission to
pursue higher studies by the Director, Youth Services and Sports.
They were thereafter placed as Incharge Physical Education Masters
in 2011 and 2012 and continued to serve on the higher posts for a
considerable period. Their placements were subsequently withdrawn
through the communications dated 28.04.2022 on the same ground
regarding the competency of the authority which had granted
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 11 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

permission. However, it is necessary to clarify that the date of
incharge placement and the date on which an employee becomes
entitled to regular promotion may not necessarily be the same. The
date of entitlement may be later, depending upon the applicable rules,
eligibility and availability of promotional vacancies.
15. The respondents have not brought to our notice any material
distinction which would justify taking a different view in the present
case. The objections raised by them regarding the validity of
permission, sanction of study leave, temporary nature of incharge
promotion and findings of the committee were also examined by this
Tribunal while deciding O.A. No. 552/2022.
16. We are of the considered view that when an identical controversy has
already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal,
similarly situated employees should ordinarily receive similar
treatment. Judicial consistency requires that a different view should
not be taken unless there are material differences in the facts or
circumstances of the case. No such distinction has been established in
the present matter.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 12 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

17. The applicants had applied for permission to pursue higher studies
through the proper departmental channel and acted upon the
permission granted by the Director, Youth Services and Sports. After
acquiring the required qualifications, they were placed as Incharge
Physical Education Masters and continued to discharge the duties of
the higher posts for several years. If there was any irregularity in the
manner in which permission was granted, the respondents were
required to examine the matter fairly and in accordance with law. The
applicants could not be made to suffer merely because of an
administrative lapse for which they were not responsible.
18. It is also important to note that the applicants were allowed to work on
the higher posts for almost eleven years. Their placements were
subsequently withdrawn without affording them a proper opportunity
of hearing. The same issue was examined in O.A. No. 552/2022,
wherein this Tribunal found the action of the respondents to be
arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice.
19. At the same time, we are conscious that an incharge promotion is
generally a temporary arrangement and does not, by itself, confer an
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 13 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

automatic right to regular promotion from the date of such placement.
Regular promotion depends upon fulfillment of the prescribed
eligibility conditions, availability of vacancies, seniority and other
requirements under the applicable service rules. Therefore, while the
applicants are entitled to the benefit of the judgment in O.A. No.
552/2022, their regularization must take effect from the dates on
which they actually became entitled to regular promotion in
accordance with the applicable rules. Such dates may be different
from the dates of their initial incharge placements.
20. We further find that the applicants cannot be denied the benefit of
promotion merely because the Department failed to take timely steps
for regularization. If similarly situated employees have already been
granted regular promotion, the respondents are required to ensure that
the applicants are not placed at a disadvantage without any lawful
justification. Their entitlement must be determined fairly, keeping in
view their eligibility, seniority, availability of promotional posts and
the treatment extended to similarly situated employees.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 14 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

21. In view of the above discussion, we find that the present Original
Application is covered by the judgment dated 04.02.2026 passed in
O.A. No. 552/2022, titled Jatinder Singh & Others v. UT of J&K &
Others. The applicants are entitled to similar relief. However, the
effective dates of their regular promotions shall be determined with
reference to the dates on which they became eligible and entitled to
such promotions under the applicable rules, and not automatically
from the dates of their incharge placements.
22. Accordingly, the present Original Application is allowed with the
following directions:
a) The impugned communications dated 28.04.2022, whereby the
incharge placements of the applicants as Physical Education
Masters were withdrawn, are hereby quashed.
b) The enquiry report dated 11.01.2022 and the consequential
decision dated 19.01.2022, insofar as they relate to the
applicants and form the basis of their reversion, are also
quashed.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 15 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

c) The respondents are directed to restore the status of the
applicants as Incharge Physical Education Masters and to
regularize their promotions to the posts of Physical Education
Masters with effect from the respective dates on which they
became entitled to regular promotion, keeping in view their
eligibility, seniority, availability of promotional vacancies and
the applicable service rules.
d) It is clarified that the dates of regular promotion shall not
automatically be treated as 05.06.2012 in the case of applicant
No. 1, Saroj Bala, and 21.10.2011 in the case of applicant No.
2, Kanchan Sharma, merely because they were placed as
Incharge Physical Education Masters on those dates. The
respondents shall determine the actual dates of their entitlement
to regular promotion in accordance with the applicable rules
and the treatment extended to similarly situated employees.
e) Upon regularization, the applicants shall be entitled to all
consequential service benefits, including seniority, pay fixation,
arrears of pay and other admissible benefits, with effect from
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV

:: 16 :: O.A. No. 1237/2022

the dates on which their regular promotions become due. Any
monetary benefits for the period during which they actually
discharged the duties of the higher posts shall be regulated in
accordance with the applicable rules.
f) The respondents shall complete the entire exercise and issue the
necessary orders within twelve weeks from the date of receipt
of a certified copy of this judgment.
23. With the above directions, the Original Application stands allowed.
There shall be no order as to costs. All pending Miscellaneous
Applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly.


(RAM MOHAN JOHRI) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
/harshit /
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAV
YADAV