INS Desk
No Comments

HC dismisses plea by Dr Firdous to continue as BMO Kalaroos

Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size Text Size Print This Page

Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has dismissed a petition by Dr Firdous Ahmad Bhat alleging that the government was ignoring his merit and suitability in granting regular promotion as Block Medical Officer in his favour as they are in the process of depriving him from performing his duties as BMO Kalaroos.
He had sought court’s direction in allowing him to continue to perform the functions and duties as Incharge Block Medical Officer, Kalaroos and direct the Treasury Officer, Sogam, to entertain and pass the bills which may be placed before him under his signatures in his capacity as Drawing & Disbursing Officer of Block Medical Office, Kalaroos.
Firdous Ahmad Bhat had approached the Court earlier, challenging order (No. 266-HME of 2019) on Mach 1, whereby he was transferred as in-charge BMO Sogam, and posted as Medical Officer, SDH, Langate.
“…merely because the petitioner (Firdous Ahmad Bhat) has been asked to hold the additional charge of BMO, Kalaroos in terms of order dated 21st of June, 2018 by the Director General Health Services, Kashmir, does not confer any right on the petitioner; be it legal, constitutional or fundamental, to approach this Court by filing the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir for directing the respondents (officials) to allow him to continue as BMO, Kalaroos,” a bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey said while dismissing Bhat’s petition.
“In the event, such a submission is acceded to and relief granted, same will amount to usurping the powers of the Government,” the court said.
The concerned officials are well within their rights and authority to see as to whether or not Bhat is to be allowed to continue to perform the duties of BMO Kalaroos, the court said. “For grant of a Writ of Mandamus, the petitioner has to establish violation of his right however, in the present case, there is no violation of any of the rights of the petitioner in case the petitioner is not allowed to continue as Incharge BMO, Kalaroos,” the court added.
On March 8 this year, the court had already directed Bhat to file a detailed representation before the government for seeking redressal of his grievance with a further stipulation to the government to consider the same in accordance with the law and the rules governing the field.
“This representation is pending before the competent authority and the petitioner, without waiting for the outcome of the said representation, has, firstly filed a civil suit before the civil Court which was dismissed with costs and, secondly the petitioner, now, has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition seeking continuation as BMO, Kalaroos,” the court said, adding, “The conduct of the petitioner is deprecable as even after being burdened with costs by the Additional District Judge, Srinagar, the petitioner has not estopped himself from approaching the Court leading to multiplicity of litigation without any fruits to be reaped by the petitioner.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *