CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR
Order Sheet
Item no.: 1
O.A./27/2026 (SRINAGAR)
[ QUASHING OF ADVERTISEMENT ]
Court No.: 2
No of Adjournment:
Order Dated: 02/02/2026
IRFAN AHMAD WAGAY
Vs
GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
For Applicant(s) Advocate : MR. AABID PANDIT ALONG WITH MS. IQRA LATEEF
For Respondent(s) Advocate : MR. SYED MUSAIB, DAG
Order of The Tribunal
1. The applicants, four (04) in number, have filed the instant O.A. Since the
cause of action and reliefs claimed by all the applicants are identical, the M.A.
for joint application under Rule 4(5)(a) of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987, is
allowed.
2. Through the medium of the instant O.A., the applicants have sought for the
following reliefs:
a. An order directing the non-applicants to set-aside/ quash the impugned Notice dated
16.01 .2026 as far as it concerns the post of Junior Assistant.
b. Direct the respondents to conduct the Type Test first, as per the original
advertisement, and only permit qualified candidates to appear for the written exam.
c. Grant an interim stay on the conduct of the OMR exam for the post of Junior Assistant
scheduled for 22.02.2026 until the final disposal of this O.A.
d. Any other order f direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favor of applicants in the
interest of justice.
3. Alongside the main reliefs, the applicants have also sought for interim relief:
a. Grant an interim stay on the conduct of the OMR exam for the post of Junior Assistant
scheduled for 22.02.2026 until the final disposal of this O.A.
b. Direct the respondents to conduct the Type Test first, as per the original
advertisement, and only permit qualified candidates to appear for the written exam.
c. That this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be please to grant any other interim or final
relief, as deemed in the facts and circumstances of the case in favor of the applicant
4. What stems out of the instant O.A. is that the respondents invited applications
for filling up the posts of Junior Assistants vide notification no. 08 of 2025 dated
27.09.2025. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that prior to the filing of
the instant O.A., the applicants filed an O.A./20/2026, which was disposed of
vide judgment dated 08.01.2026. The operative portion of the same reads as
under:
"The case is disposed of by providing that the respondents shall strictly
adhere to the conditions or the notes, as contained in the advertisement
notice no. 08 of 2025 dated 27.09.2025. While parting, learned counsel for
the applicants submits that the applicants have also filed a representation,
which has not yet been disposed of by the respondents. Accordingly, the
respondents are further directed to dispose of the representations, so filed
by the applicants, in accordance with the law and the mandate of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case titled as Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan
High court. Needful shall be done by the respondents with due dispatch."
5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that despite a direction
passed by this Court on 08.01.2026, the respondents have yet again issued a
notification dated 16.01.2026, as it relates to the Junior Assistants in various
departments, for which tentative date of commencement of examination is
reflected as 22.02.2026. He submits that the respondents could not have issued
the advance notice / tentative schedule of examination notification without first
complying with the judgment earlier passed by this Court dated 08.01.2026. He
submits that the respondents have issued the impugned notice only to frustrate
the earlier judgment passed by the Court, and submits that what was incumbent
upon the respondents was to first comply with the directions passed by this Court
in letter and spirit, only thereaftere should have passed the impugned notice. He
further submits that the impugned notice is only an afterthought to accommodate
their blue-eyed candidates and submits that the action of the respondents is
violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
6. Heard.
7. Issue notice. Mr. Syed Musaib, learned DAG appears and accepts notice for
the respondents, who is granted four weeks' time to file his detailed response. In
the meanwhile, subject to objections of the other side and till next date of
hearing, the respondents are directed to adhere to and comply with the earlier
directions passed by the Court dated 08.01.2026, by passing a speaking order and
disposing of the representations filed by the applicants, and till such time, the
impugned notice shall not be acted upon. However, it is expected that the
representations shall be decided on or before the date fixed in the impugned
notice i.e. 22.02.2026. It is also made clear that the respondents shall keep this
Court informed regarding the disposal of the representations filed by the
applicants on or before the date fixed in the notice.
8. List on 04.05.2026.
Prasant Kumar M. S. Latif
Member (A) Member (J)
Abhishek Punia
( court master )