The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has restrained the government from proceeding with promotions unless candidates from the Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) categories entitled to reservation are duly considered. This decision comes as a major relief for reserved category employees who have long been denied their rightful promotions due to a controversial government directive.
Read Also:- J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Alleged Terror Sympathizer, Citing Vague Allegations
Justice M.A. Chowdhary, while delivering the judgment, stated:
“The respondents are restrained from making any promotions unless candidates belonging to the SC/ST reserved categories entitled for consideration for reservation in promotions are considered.”
The ruling was made in response to a petition filed by Mohammad Jamal Sheikh and King Kumar, both engineers working in J&K Power Transmission Corporation Limited, Jammu Power Distribution Corporation Limited, and Kashmir Power Distribution Corporation Limited. These individuals, along with others from reserved categories like SC, ST, Residents of Backward Area (RBA), Actual Line of Control (ALC), and Other Social Castes (OSC), sought justice against the government's failure to implement reservation in promotions.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a circular issued by the General Administration Department (GAD) that instructed all administrative secretaries to keep positions meant for reserved employees vacant. The petitioners argued that this directive violated Article 16(4A) of the Indian Constitution and the J&K Reservation Act, 2004, which mandate reservation in promotions.
Read Also:- Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Trial Court Cannot Revisit Its Final Orders
Advocate Areeb Javed Kawoosa, representing the petitioners, contended that the government had neglected to implement reservation in promotions for over a decade despite clear legal provisions. He referenced the Supreme Court’s stay order in Nasib Singh & Ors vs. State of J&K & Ors, which had put on hold a 2015 Division Bench ruling of the J&K High Court that struck down reservation in promotions.
Furthermore, he pointed out that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Jammu Bench, had already quashed the impugned circular in Satish Chander vs. UT of J&K & Ors on December 17, 2024. Kawoosa emphasized that since the entire Constitution of India, including Article 16(4A), became applicable to J&K in 2019, the government was legally bound to provide reservation in promotions.
Government’s Defense
On the other hand, Government Advocate Furkan Yaqub defended the circular by citing the 2015 Ashok Kumar judgment, which had ruled reservation in promotions unconstitutional in J&K. He argued that since the matter was still pending before the Supreme Court, the government could not proceed with reservations in promotions.
Legal and Constitutional Standpoint
The High Court examined the constitutional and legal framework before reaching its decision. It acknowledged that before 2019, the 77th Constitutional Amendment (which introduced Article 16(4A) to provide reservation in promotions) was not extended to J&K. However, after the revocation of Article 370, the entire Constitution of India, including Article 16(4A), applies fully to J&K.
Read Also:- J&K High Court Upholds Five-Year Limit for Govt Employees to Alter Date of Birth in Service Records
The court ruled:
“In view of the application of the whole of the Constitution of India, including the relevant provision of Clause (4A) of Article 16 in the year 2019, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir is under a legal obligation to provide reservation in promotions in accordance with the provisions made in the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Act, 2004 and Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005.”
Furthermore, the court criticized the contradictory stance of the UT administration, which had itself argued before the Supreme Court that reservation in promotions was applicable to J&K and that the Ashok Kumar judgment should be overturned. Despite this, the GAD issued Circular No. 10-JK (GAD) of 2021, contradicting its own stand before the Apex Court.
Violation of Fundamental Rights
The court strongly condemned the government’s failure to collect quantifiable data to assess the representation of SC/ST employees, as required by the Indra Sawhney (1993), M. Nagaraj (2007), and Jarnail Singh (2022) judgments. It observed:
Read Also:- Unfair Toll Collection on Poorly Maintained Highways: J&K High Court Orders 80% Reduction in Toll Fees
“It is strange that after making application of the whole of the Constitution of India lock, stock, and barrel to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir in the year 2019, the impugned Circular was issued by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir in the year 2022 whereby all the Administrative Departments were advised not to fill up the slots meant for the reserved categories in promotion.”
The court further noted that denying promotions to SC/ST employees while granting them elsewhere in India amounts to class legislation, violating Article 14 of the Constitution.
APPEARANCE:
Mr. Areeb Javed Kawoosa, Advocate For Petitioners. Mr. Furkan Yaqub, GA for the UT of J&K
Case Title: Mohammad Jamal Sheikh Vs UT Of J&K
