Jammu, May 28: There are rules, which had restricted the Govt not to continue one officer beyond some prescribed period of time with incharge system but being violated by different departments on numerous occasions.
As per recruitment rules STP cannot be placed with out Masters diploma in the relavent field but one incharge Town Planner placed as STP is reportedly not with Post Gradute Diploma or its equivalent as per recruitment rules is also a matter of concern if so.
Once, one Building Officer with basis qualification of Diploma in Draftsman was also posted as Senior Town Planner in JMC but after publication of CTN was removed.
One DTP, Jagdish Hans, who was on deputation to JDA had completed tenure of more than 4 years but as per deputation rules deputation cannot be extended more than 3 years followed by 1 year on the request of borrowing department but he has been assigned with the charge of CTP by the VC JDA despite his complete failure for not framing Zonal Plans despite lapse of more than 4 years & deciding plans with his choice without placing in BOCA in violations of rules.
Why not Govt is conducting regular DPC's to regularize the eligible ones is a big question on the Govt as a whole and which will get violation out of the Picture?
However prmotion rules of JKPSC reads as:-
References of vacancies.- (1) The Departments shall refer vacancies in the promotion quota to Departmental Promotion Committees at least twice a year preferably in the month of January and July in accordance with SRO; 166 of 2005 dated: 14m June, 2005 and also take necessary steps for having the meetings convened.
The Apex Court in Ramakant Shripad Sinai Advalpalkar v. Union of India and Ors. reported as held:
The third contention is that appellant's' in charge' arrangements in the higher post had continued for so long a period that a determination of equivalence on the basis of his lower substantive post would become arbitrary. The contention ignores the fact that an' in charge' arrangement is not a recognition of or is necessarily based on seniority and that, therefore, no rights, equities or expectations could be built upon it.
The settled legal position that emerges from the facts of one case and the law, is that the statutory rules governing the regulation of seniority and promotion have to be adhered to and not to be violated in any manner that too by an administrative decision.
It can be observed that three orders issued by H&UDD of incharge promotion/placements , theoratically in violation of Rules, copies with CTN, which read as under:-
 
Recently, H&UDD had made one Incharge STP as Incharge CTP, Incharge
|