Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 660 (JK)

Suram Chand v. State of J&K & Ors.

2015-12-11

N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR

body2015
JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition is filed praying for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as he has completed seven years in service. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was engaged on daily wage basis in the year, 1993 and completed seven years period in the year 2000 and even after completing seven years, respondents have not regularized the services of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that when the list was submitted to the Higher Authorities for regularization of daily wagers who were eligible in terms of SRO 64 of 1994 against the name of the petitioner it has been mentioned that he has been engaged after 01.04.1994 after the issuance of Government Order No. 26-F of 1994, dated 31.01.1994 which was the cut off date for regularization of the daily wagers, therefore, he is not entitled to regularization of his services, as claimed. 4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that by Government Order No. 1285 issued pursuant to Cabinet decision No. 135/11 (KB) dated 10.09.2001 the cutoff date was extended to 06.11.2001, therefore, the petition is entitled to be regularized in terms of the Rules. Learned senior counsel heavily relied on the decision of Division Bench of this Court reported in 2012 (4) JKJ 1051 [HC] : 2013 SLJ 73 (State of J&K and ors. v. Mushtaq Ahmad Sohail and ors). 5. The issue regarding engagement and regularization of Daily Rated Workers/Daily Wagers was considered by the Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported as 2012 (4) JKJ 1051 [HC] : 2013 SLJ 73 (State of J&K and Ors. v. Mushtaq Ahmad Sohail and Ors). In paragraph Nos. 13 and 14 of the said judgment, it has been held thus- "13. As against order No. 144-GAD of 2001, dated 02.02.2001, the daily wagers/work charged employees, who were aggrieved, filed number of writ petitions. Finally the judgment passed in those writ petitions were challenged by medium of bund of LPAs with lead case Ashok Kumar v. State of J&K and ors. which have been decided vide judgment dated 26.07.2002, reported in 2003 SLJ 475 : 2003 (4) JKJ 93 [HC]. Finally the judgment passed in those writ petitions were challenged by medium of bund of LPAs with lead case Ashok Kumar v. State of J&K and ors. which have been decided vide judgment dated 26.07.2002, reported in 2003 SLJ 475 : 2003 (4) JKJ 93 [HC]. In the reported judgment, position vis-a-vis right of casual labour/daily wagers/adhoc employees, has been taken note of and as many as 15 directions were issued as contained in para 45 of the judgment. It may not be out of place to mention here that the cut-off date has also been extended to 06.11.2001 in terms of Govt. order No. 1285-Gad of 2001, dated 06.11.2001 which has been issued in pursuance to Cabinet Decision No. 135/11(KB) dated 10.09.2001. The above referred judgment was challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court by medium of Civil Appeal No. 9298 of 2003 and Civil Appeal No. 9299 of 2003. While disposing of Civil Appeal No. 9299 of 2003, the following order has been passed- "Our attention has been drawn to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of this court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Uamdevi and others (supra). In our view, this judgment has no application in view of the fact that the respondents are employed the State Government and are claiming the benefit of a scheme formulated by the Notification dated 31st January, 1994, as modified by Notification dated 6th November, 2001. The High Court is perfectly justified in its judgment. We are satisfied that the impugned judgment of the High Court needs no interference at our hands. In the result, the Appeal is dismissed. No costs." 14. What would emerge from above is that the daily rated workers/work charged employees who were appointed after imposition of ban and continued beyond ban period were given benefit of notification dated 6th November, 2001, which, in-effect, would mean that the daily rated workers/work charged employees engaged even after 01.04.1994 till 6th November, 2001, were also entitled to be regularized in terms of the Jammu and Kashmir Daily Rated Workers/Work-Charged Employees (Regularization) Rules,1994." 6. Following the above said judgment and the principle laid down therein, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization on completion of seven years from date of initial appointment without any monitory benefits, as there was no break in the service. Following the above said judgment and the principle laid down therein, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization on completion of seven years from date of initial appointment without any monitory benefits, as there was no break in the service. The said exercise be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. Petition disposed of