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

2024 Supreme(J&K) 174

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Rajnesh Oswal, Rahul Bharti, JJ.
Indira Gandhi National Open University and others – Appellants
Versus
Bashir Ahmad Sofi and others - Respondents
LPASW No. 91 of 2016, IA Nos. 01 of 2016, 01 of 2018 c of w CPSW no. 969 of 2017
Decided On : 03-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Syed Faisal Qadri, Sr. Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. R. A. Jan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Suhail Mehraj, Adv., Ms. Yasmeena, Advocate vice Mr. T. M. Shamsi, DSGI

Employment rights are influenced by employment nature and regularization potential based on lengthy service, emphasizing fairness in recruitment practices.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16, and 311(2) - Employment law - Group 'C' and 'D' posts at Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) - Writ petitioners sought recognition of their contractual appointments as regular - Court noted that the petitioners worked for extended periods yet were engaged on contractual terms, complicating their claim for permanent status. (Paras 7, 40, 47)

(B) Regularization - The court emphasized that irregularities existed in IGNOU's recruitment procedures as per the Board of Management’s decisions. Though the court set aside the previous order declaring petitioners regular employees, it mandated a review for possible regularization. (Paras 44, 47)

Facts of the case:
The writ petitioners were engaged on contractual basis against Group 'C' and 'D' posts at IGNOU Regional Centre Srinagar, claiming regularization after prolonged service. They contested the employment model used by IGNOU, believing it undermined their rights.

Findings of Court:
The court found no clarity on whether the positions were meant for regular employment and ruled out the prior court's declaration of regularization while directing the management to reassess the petitioners' employment status.

Issues: The key issues revolved around the nature of employment (contractual vs. regular), the petitioners' rights based on their prolonged service, and adherence to the recruitment policies.

Ratio Decidendi: The court asserted that the nature of the appointments being contractual was clear from the advertisements and engagement letters, yet acknowledged the longstanding engagement of petitioners warranted a reconsideration.

Result: Appeal allowed; previous judgment set aside with directions for management review.

Table of Content
1. hearing and review of the case's procedural history. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual background leading to writ petition establishment. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. clarification between regular appointments and contract employment. (Para 40 , 42 , 44 , 46)

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the writ pleadings and the documents therewith and also the present letters patent appeal.

2. A short judgment of the learned Single Bench in the writ petition has engaged the Division Bench in a letters patent appeal for long to face the final curtain on the matter in issue.

3. The respondents No. 1 to 12 joined together to be the writ petitioners to file a writ petition No. SWP 1429/2009 on 09/10/2009 before the writ court against the appellants No. 1 to 5 herein who figured as the respondents No. 2 to 6 in the said writ petition. The pro forma respondent Union of India, UOI herein, figured as the respondent No. 1 in the writ petition.

4. The appellant No. 1 is Indira Gandhi National Open University (‘IGNOU’ in short), the appellant No. 2 is the Registrar Administration IGNOU, the appellant No. 3 is the Director, Regional Services Division IGNOU, the appellant No. 4 is the Regional Director, Regional Centre Srinagar IGNOU and appellant No. 5 is the Selection Committee Regional Centre Srinagar IGNOU.

5. For the facility of convenience, we would refer the parties herein, i.e., the appellants and the respondents by their reference as figured in the writ petition i.e., the writ petitioners and the writ respondents.

6. In the writ petition, the writ petitioners came forward asking for the following reliefs:

“i) Writ, in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ declaring the Appointment of Petitioners against the Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts currently held by the Petitioners at the Regional Centre Srinagar of the Respondent No.2 here at Srinagar, made in culmination of Regular Selection in pursuance and in furtherance to duly published Advertisement Notice dated 7.12.2007, as regular and substantive Appointments, the expression, “Contractual’ occurring in the respective Appointments Orders notwithstanding, entitled in law by reason and by virtue of the mandate of the Constitutional guarantees enshrined in the Articles 14, 16 and 311(2) of the Constitution of India corresponding to Section 126(2) of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, to hold the posts with all the service benefits including the Salary, Allowances, Promotional Prospects as well as the Tenure of Service being enjoyed by the Regular Appointees to Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts under the Recruitment Rules governing the Service, be issued in favour of the Petitioners and against the Respondents;

ii) Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ declaring the impugned action of the Respondent No.5 in the form of impugned Advertisement Notice published in the Delhi Srinagar Times dated 24.9.2009 inviting quotations from registered/ approved manpower supplying agencies for supply of manpower to man through the agency of Contract Labour the posts/positions held by the Petitioners on Appointment through regular Selection Process, totally arbitrary and deliberately malicious device calculated to circumventing constitutionally guaranteed vested right of the Petitioners to the Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts held by the Petitioners at the Regional Centre Srinagar on a regular Selection Process and as such non-est in law by reason of being violative of constitutional guarantee supra, be also issued in favour of Petitioners and against the Respondents.

iii) Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ to quash the impugned Notice published by the Respondent No. 5 in Daily Srinagar Times on 24.9.2009, inviting quotations from registered/approved manpower supplying agencies for supply of manpower to man, through the agency of Contract Labour, the posts/ positions including Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts held by the Petiti

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