MUZAFFARABAD, July 17: The education department in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) is in a fix as to how to deal with some decisions of the region’s superior judiciary which, it believes, can set a “bad precedent” for others besides creating “administrative problems” for the government, Dawn has learnt.

The decisions given in the favour of a kin of a former chief justice of the AJK Supreme Court have helped her claim salary and other emoluments from taxpayers’ money under the “judicial cover” without attending her duties since October 2005, record of the case reveals.

Amna Akbar Kiani, a lecturer in English in Government Postgraduate College for Girls Muzaffarabad, had filed a petition in Mirpur circuit of AJK High Court on December 3, 2005, through her father-in-law, Justice (retired) Raja Khurshid Kiani, praying that the education department be ordered not to compel or ask her to attend her duties in Muzaffarabad till the construction of college building or her official residence or a rented house and she may be declared to be on duty, entitled to all emoluments and benefits, while residing in Islamabad.

The then chief justice ordered the department on the same day that it shall not force the petitioner to remain present in Muzaffarabad till the official accommodation is provided to her and she will be deemed to be on her duty and shall be entitled to all emoluments.

In its objections, filed on January 6, 2006, the department contended that under the prevaling rules government servants staying away from their duty were considered to be absent and hence could not be paid emoluments.

It pointed out that not only the petitioner but thousands of other government servants had also been badly affected by the quake and while many of them, including female teaching staff, were rendering duties in remote areas, the petitioner was reluctant to serve even in the state capital.

The department also maintained that if such a discriminatory relief was given to any employee, others could cite it as an example and seek the same, causing administrative problems for the government and educational loss, in case of teachers, to students.

However, the court admitted the case for regular hearing in Mirpur circuit, taking advantage of which the petitioner continued to abstain from duty in Muzaffarabad while regularly drawing salary under the “judicial cover.”

When the department transferred her to an intermediate college in district Kotli on November 13, 2007, she did not join that institution as well.

When the AG office again stopped her salary owing to absence, her counsel filed two “contempt of court” applications in the High Court in succession and though the department reiterated its pleas that the government could not pay salary to any absentee, the court orders on December 26, 2007 and March 10, 2008 came as a bolt from the blue.

In the latest order, the court directed the department to make payment of salary and other emoluments within a week’s time, with submission of a compliance report to it.

The department filed an application in Supreme Court for leave to appeal on March 18, but it was dismissed on the grounds that the court could not grant “anti-dated status quo”.

Interestingly, the original petition is yet to be disposed of by the court even after the lapse of nearly three years.

In the meanwhile, the S&GAD issued a notification on June 21, attaching Ms Kiani with AJK president’s camp office in (Kashmir House) Islamabad “till further orders.” The notification said she would draw salary against her actual post in (education department).

Sources said the education department had referred the whole matter to the prime minister with a request for cancellation of the June 21 notification as it would affect the academic activities in the concerned college.

“This case creates impression that there is no law for the elite class and it (law) is applied only to those who have no say in the echelons of power,” sources quoted the department as saying in a petition to the premier.