Srinagar: A “feudal mindset” dominates much of our bureaucracy. It affects most the children of lesser gods; its apathy demolishes their sense of worth and ruins their aspirations.
The statement is confirmed in a case titled Shakeel Ahmad Shakeel Vs. Farooq Ahmad Shah and other bureaucrats of the executive machinery of Jammu and Kashmir.
Almost three decades ago, the then state government issued an advertisement notice No. 3/1996 dated December 24, 1996 for filling some posts of teachers under district cadre, in Budgam.
Some of the “genuine” aspirants were dropped during the “controversial” selection process and the aggrieved sought justice from the top court of the state.
The court while disposing of their writ petition (SWP No. 10/1998), directed the concerned bureaucrats to appoint them against the advertised vacancies.
The orders of appointment were required to be issued within one week from the date the copy of the order was served to the respondents. Besides the court order entitled the petitioners to all the service benefits which had been given to the persons who stood appointed on the post of teachers in the selection process initiated in pursuance to the three decade ago advertisement.
But the authorities didn’t heed to the orders forcing the aggrieved candidates to file a suit of contempt.
Seemingly an endless judicial and bureaucratic chase sapped the vigor of the victims, who by now had turned middle-aged silver haired and wrinkle faced creatures. Lost in the maze of the merciless places of authority, they gave up their pursuit and took to other vocations for the sake of sustenance. Some of them might have now crossed the age of superannuation in the government services.
Somehow, a chance as it would have been, the fate of the victims woke up from its deep sleep. Their contempt petition, pending adjudication before the court since long time, got listed before the newly appointed judge of the J&K High Court, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal.
Justice Nrgal observed “even after the disposal of their writ petition the respondent bureaucrats have neither implemented the order passed by this court nor have they chosen to file a statement of facts/compliance report”.
This “apathy” by the concerned government respondents has been inspite of the fact that Asif Ahmad Bhat, the then state counsel had accepted the notice of the court. He had also sought time to obtain instructions, says the judgment by Justice Wasim Nargal.
The judge remarked “it is very sordid state of affairs that the petition which has been preferred way back in the year 1998 and allowed later on by virtue of a detailed order, the respondents have neither implemented the aforesaid judgment passed by this court till date nor have they chosen to file statement of facts”.
In the peculiar facts and circumstances, the Justice Nargal’s bench was left with no other option but to procure the presence of official respondents to explain the reasons for non-implementation of the order passed by J&K High Court way back and also non-filing of the statement of facts/compliance report.
In the meantime, the respondents have been directed to file the statement of facts on or before the next date of hearing.
The respondents while filing the statement of facts shall also explain therein the reasons and steps taken in furtherance of a direction passed by the court.
The matter is again posted on the 7th of next month.
