Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 231 (JK)

Bilal Ahmad Mir v. Union Of India

2014-06-04

MOHAMMAD YAQOOB MIR

body2014
1. The case set up by the petitioner is that he was engaged as a consolidated paid worker in 1998. Later on nature of the engagement was first changed to that of semi skilled worker, then to skilled worker. He has been working with the respondents for last 15 years but has not been permanently absorbed. 2. Respondents have invited applications from eligible candidates for various posts including skilled support staff for which petitioner claims to be eligible having the prescribed qualification. Having crossed the age limit has moved application for age relaxation, same has remained to be relaxed, as a result thereof he could not participate in the selection process. 3. Respondents, in their reply, have stated that the petitioner is being deployed by the Labour Agency. Labourers are being engaged through reputed agency by a contract awarded to the agency/agencies. The benefits, which are available to the labourers, are being paid regularly, therefore, there is no question of his absorption. For direct recruitment to any post, ICAR rules/guidelines are being followed. Petitioner too has a right to apply subject to eligibility. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the earlier process initiated is almost complete, merit list has been prepared, now it shall be too late in the day for the petitioner to claim consideration as against those posts. Further added that afresh number of such posts are likely to be advertised, petitioner shall be at liberty to apply for the same. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may compete for the fresh posts but he has already crossed the age limit, he has been working with the respondents for last 15 years, now all other doors are closed for him, he cannot compete anywhere, his long association of 15 years has helped him in gaining lot of experience, he shall be an asset for the respondents experience-wise, therefore, interests of the petitioner may be directed to be protected. 6. In view of the rival submissions, it shall be quite appropriate for the petitioner to apply as and when fresh posts will be advertised. Suffice it to observe that in view of 15 years of experience of the petitioner, his application as against said posts, when advertised, irrespective of age bar shall be entertained and in case he makes grade, relaxation of age in accordance with rules shall also be favourably considered. Suffice it to observe that in view of 15 years of experience of the petitioner, his application as against said posts, when advertised, irrespective of age bar shall be entertained and in case he makes grade, relaxation of age in accordance with rules shall also be favourably considered. 7. Petition accordingly disposed of.