Back
2018 Supreme(J&K) 740
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR, M.K. HANJURA, JJ.
J&K SRTC - Appellant
Versus
ALL J&K WORKS UNION - Respondent
LPASW No. 273 of 2017, MP No. 01 of 2017, Caveat No. 3421 of 2017
Decided on : 07-02-2018
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Altaf Haqani, Advocate
For the Caveator :Mr. A.H. Naik, Advocate
An appeal would lie only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt.
Headnote:
GTU - Employment Dispute - Central Road Transport Corporation Act - [Section 19, Section 94 of the Jammu and Kashmir Contempt Courts Act, 1997] - The court discussed the jurisdiction to punish for contempt and the maintainability of the appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Act and Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The judgment emphasized that an appeal would lie only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents, erstwhile employees of the Government Transport Undertaking, filed a writ petition seeking release of arrears and benefits as permanent government employees. The Writ Court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to release the benefits. The appellants failed to comply, leading to a contempt petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that an appeal would lie only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt.
Issues: Jurisdiction to punish for contempt, maintainability of the appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Act and Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that an appeal would lie only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
M.K. HANJURA, J.
1. Respondents, the erstwhile employees of the Government Transport Undertaking (for short called and referred to hereinafter, "GTU") filed a writ petition bearing SWP No. 3082-J of 2010 in a representative capacity through their registered Union, pleading therein that they have been appointed prior to the year 1976 as Daily Rated Workers by the GTU. They were being paid dearness allowance as admissible under Government Rules in the same manner as was being paid to the other staff/employees of the GTU. They proceeded to state that they were also granted and extended all such benefits as were available to the other employees of the GTU working on regular basis in the shape of casual leave, medical leave and holidays etc. They further contended that on the basis of the length of their service, they attained the status of temporary employees of the GTU and were entitled to be regularized/confirmed on their respective posts. However, before such an order could be passed, the Government vide order No. 25-TR of 1979 dated 27.03.1979 decided to place the services of the employees of the GTU at the disposal of the J&K State Road Transport Corporation (for short Corporation) established on 01.09.1976 in pursuance of the Central Road Transport Corporation Act. The petitioners on the above set of facts craved the indulgence of this Court for the grant of the following reliefs in their favour.
(a) Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to release the arrears of Cola of the petitioners herein (whose names are given in Annexure-A) from 1999 to 2012 as per communication of respondent No. 5-Managing Director vide his letter No. JKSRTCF/Pen-II/PS/MD/044 dated 15.07.2014 and cleared by the Finance Department as reflected in Govt. Order No. 110-TR/AF of 2014 dated 10.12.2014 read with Order No. 032 of 2013 dated 30.01.2013.
(b) Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to release all the benefits including Leave Salary, H.R.A and other consequential benefits to which the petitioners (whose names are given in the list Annexure A) are entitled t as permanent Govt. Employees.
(c) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction/relief, the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case, be also granted in favour of the petitioner against the Respondents with Costs.
2. The Writ Court accorded consideration to the petition of the petitioners and vide its judgment dated 01.07.2013 directed as under:
"26. This petition is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned Government order dated 11.09.2003 read with the order contained in the impugned communication dated 06.07.2010 addressed by Under Secretary to Government, Finance Department to the petitioner are quashed. Any Government order on the basis of which the contents of the impugned communication dated 06.07.2010 are based shall be treated as declared inconsequential and ineffective. The respondents in general, and respondents 1 to 3, in particular, are directed to take immediate necessary steps to make the offer of exercise of the requisite option to the petitioners. In case any of the members of the petitioner union has retired, the benefits of option shall also be extended to such retired employee. Needless to mention, that the benefit shall be made available and extended to deceased members of the petitioner union as well. Depending upon the option so exercised by the members of the petitioner union, the respondents shall take further steps to settle the matters. The needful shall be done within three months from the date a copy of this judgment is served on the respondents.
27. This is a case where petty government servants have been engaged in attritional litigation by the respondents for decades together. The conduct of the State-respondents as reflected in this Judgment, particularly their asking the petitioners to withdraw Court cases and then resile from the assurance extended to the petitioners, would warrant award of costs. However, taking a
