Adherence to rules and regulations in the promotion process is crucial, and all eligible candidates should be considered for promotion based on their eligibility.

Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J.

Stop gap arrangement made pursuant to Order No. 99-LC of 2011 dated 14.10.2011 has entangled the parties in a litigative process. It is advantageous to notice the order as it is:

“In view of the dearth of manpower and in the interest of administration, the following Asstt. Labour Welfare Officers, Caretakers and Sr. Assistants are hereby ordered to work as incharge Labour Inspectors purely on stop gap basis in their own pay and grade till the posts are formally filled up on substantive basis in terms of the J&K Labour (Subordinate Service) Recruitment Rules, 1988. The placement of these incumbents as incharge Labour Inspectors shall not confer on them any preferential right for regularization through Departmental Promotion Committee.

This arrangement is made without prejudice to the seniority and superior claim of others, if any, and also outcome of any writ petition(s) pending before any Competent Court of law.

S/Sh

1. Kuldeep Kumar

2. Ravinder Singh

3. Anoop Raj(RBA)

4. Idris Ali

5. Firdousa Ramzan

6. Sanjay Kumar Kaw

Charge Allowance as admissible under rules is also sanctioned.

Sd/-

Labour Commissioner

J&K Govt. Srinagar

No. LC/Estt/2011.OPG/762-70Dated 14-10-2011

2. The order suggests that the placement of the employees as incharge Labour Inspectors in their own pay and grade is until filling up of the posts on substantive basis in terms of J&K Labour (Subordinate Service) Recruitment Rules, 1988. It also envisage that the placement as incharge Labour Inspectors shall not confer any preferential right for regularization through Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) and even such an arrangement shall be without prejudice to the seniority and superior claim of the employees.

3. The petitioner who in the final seniority list of Senior Assistant issued by the Department on 01.07.2011 figures as the last candidate at Sl. No. 29 and his date of promotion to the post of Senior Assistant is shown as 01.01.2010 under Category SC.

4. The Recruitment Rules of 1988 provide mode and method for promotion to the post of Labour Inspector. Same is as under:

SCHEDULE II

Executive

TABLE

Class	Category	Designation of the post	Grade	Minimum qualification for direct recruitment	Method of Recruitment
I	…..	Labour Inspector	600-925	Essential Degree in Arts or its equivalent qualification from any recognized University. Desirability Degree in Economics or Commerce or Sociology or its equivalent of any recognized University.	I. 25% by direct recruitment. II. By Promotion from Class IV 20% from Class V 20% and Class III category ‘A’ (Ministerial) 25% having not less than three years service in that class and who have passed the prescribed Departmental Examination

5. Petitioner was required to have three years experience in the feeding class which he did not possess in the year 2011 that is why he has not challenged the said order till the year 2013. Now when he has challenged it, respondents appear to have woke up from deep slumber by stating that the substantive promotion of all eligible candidates including the petitioner to the post of Labour Inspector would be considered in the next DPC in accordance with the rules. Why respondent authorities have not taken steps for finalization of promotion on substantive basis from the year 2011 when the seniority list was finalized is a question which has remained unanswered but as a consequence thereof the private respondents are subjected to a disadvantageous position, as by now many more other employees in the feeding cadre may have become eligible for consideration.

6. Vide interim order dated 01.07.2013, the operation of the order impugned dated 14.10.2011 has been directed to remain in abeyance. When this direction was not carried into effect, a contempt petition appears to have been filed, as a result whereof respondent La