SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(J&K) 204

Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Tashi Rabstan, J.
Zahoor Hussain & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
University of Kashmir & Ors. - Respondent
SWP No. 446/2015
Decided On : 25-04-2016

Advocates:
For the Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s):Mr. B.A. Bashir, Sr. Advocate With Ms. Farah Bashir, Advocate for Petitioner 1, Mr. J.H. Reshi, Advocate for Petitioner 2 & Mr. F.A. Wani, Advocate for Petitioner 3.
For the Respondent(s):Mr. T.H. Khawja, Advocate, Mr. Javed Iqbal, Advocate & Mr. Gazanfar Ali, Advocate.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners were entitled to be regularised against the posts of Junior Professional Assistants based on their qualifications and eligibility criteria required for the post at the time of their initial engagement, as per the guidelines provided in Notification No. F(Regular-Casual/Const-Gen.Adm/KU/14.

Headnote:

Regularisation - Petitioners' claim for regularisation of their services against the posts of Junior Professional Assistants - Notification No. F(Regular-Casual/Const-Gen.Adm/KU/14 - Summary of Acts and Sections

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners seek regularisation of their services as Junior Professional Assistants in the respondent University after working on a casual/contractual basis since 2007. They filed a writ petition seeking relief through a writ of certiorari to quash the Advertisement Notice and a writ of mandamus to command the respondents to regularise their services before filling up remaining posts.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that petitioners 2 & 3 were engaged as Junior Professional Assistants and were entitled to seek regularisation against the said posts. The court also noted that the respondents' contention that petitioners 2 & 3 were engaged as 'Orderlies' was contradicted by the engagement orders and communications submitted by the petitioners.

Issues: The main issue was whether petitioners 2 & 3 were engaged as Junior Professional Assistants and were entitled to seek regularisation against the said posts.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners were entitled to be regularised against the posts of Junior Professional Assistants based on their qualifications and eligibility criteria required for the post at the time of their initial engagement. The court also emphasized the need for regularisation as per the guidelines provided in Notification No. F(Regular-Casual/Const-Gen.Adm/KU/14.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition and held that the petitioners were entitled to be regularised against the posts of Junior Professional Assistants in accordance with the regularisation policy of the respondent University contained in Notification No. F(Regular-Casual/Const-Gen.Adm/KU/14.

JUDGMENT

1. Petitioners are aggrieved of non-consideration of their claim for regularisation of their services against the posts of Junior Professional Assistants as according to them, they are working on contractual/casual basis since 2007 in respondent University as Junior Professional Assistants. Petitioners' case is that petitioner No. 1 came to be engaged on contractual basis as Junior Professional Assistant vide order No. F(Apptt-C.Eng)Adm/KU/07, dated 29th August 2007, while petitioners 2 & 3 so appointed in terms of Order No. F(Engg.CL)AIL/KU/07, dated 27th December 2007. Further contention of petitioners is that though in the year 2011, respondents issued Advertisement Notice, advertising the posts of Junior Professional Assistant, but it was not concluded. University Council, it is contended, has passed and approved Resolution dated 11th October 2013 for regularising persons engaged on casual/contractual basis, which was followed by Notification dated 3rd September 2014, disclosing decision as regards regularisation of persons engaged on casual/contractual basis in accord with guidelines contained in the said Notification. Petitioners state that they submitted their particulars for regularisation of their services. Meanwhile, it is stated in writ petition, applications were invited vide Advertisement Notice No. V of 2014, dated 5th September 2014, by respondent University to fill up Junior Professional Assistant posts, and thereafter Notice dated 4th March 2015 was issued to conduct written test for posts of Junior Professional Assistants. Aggrieved of Advertisement Notice No. V of 2014, dated 5th September 2014 and Notice dated 4th March 2015, petitioners have knocked at portals of this Court with instant writ petition seeking following relief:


a) By writ of certiorari, quashing impugned Advertisement Notice No. V of 2014, dated 5th September 2014 and Notice dated 4th March 2015;


b) By writ of mandamus, commanding respondents to take formal action upon their letter dated 16th October 2014 and issue formal orders of regularisation as Junior Professional Assistants in favour of petitioners, before taking any step to fill up remaining posts of Junior Professional Assistants.


2. Reply has been filed by respondent University. Respondent University avers that only petitioner No. 1 has been engaged against post of Junior Professional Assistant in 2007 whereas petitioners 2 & 3 have been engaged on casual basis to extend casual help, like "Orderlies" and that petitioners 2 & 3 have neither been engaged as Junior Professional Assistants nor have they been working so. Petitioners 2 & 3 are said to have no right to be regularised against the posts of Junior Professional Assistants on the ground that they are not working against the said posts.


3. This Court, when the matter first time came up for consideration, on 11th March 2015, issued notice to respondents and directed them to proceed with selection process but not to finalise it. In terms of order dated 31st August 2015, this Court modified interim order dated 11th March 2015, by providing that respondents would fill up one post of Junior Professional Assistant, so as to satisfy claim of petitioner No, 1 and that interim direction would hold good as far as petitioners 2 & 3 were concerned. Again on 29th September 2015, this Court, modified interim order dated 11th March 2015, by providing that three posts of Junior Professional Assistants would not be filled up till further orders from this Court and respondent University would be free to fill up rest of posts in accordance with Rules.


4. One Ms. Rehana Nazir daughter of Nazir Ahmad Ganai resident of Shalla Bagh, Hawal, Srinagar, moved an application (MP No. 01/2016) seeking her impleadment as party respondent No. 7 in writ petition. Her application was, vide Order dated 3rd February 2016, allowed and she incorporated as party respondent No, 7. Another application, being MP No. 02/2016, was filed by Ms. Sabha Ali daughter of Ali
































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top