Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 540
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, J, MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, A
Ashish Sharma – Appellant
Versus
D/o Power Development Ut Of J&k – Respondent
T.A./534/2020
Ms. Surinder Kour, ld. sr. adv., Mr. Hunar Gupta, ld. DAG, Mr. Sudesh Magotra, ld. AAG
Absorption claims by employees of a private contractor in a government entity are not legally enforceable without an established employer-employee relationship.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Employment rights - Petitioners sought absorption in JKSPDC after project takeover, claiming violation of equality and fair treatment - Court found no employer-employee relationship with JKSPDC, thus no legal right to absorption - Recruitment notice for fresh candidates upheld. (Paras 3, 8, 10, 11)
(B) Legitimate Expectation - The principle does not override statutory provisions and recruitment rules; each case must be decided on its own merits. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, ITI-trained technicians, claimed absorption in JKSPDC after years of service in Baglihar Hydroelectric Project, asserting rights under Articles 14 and 16. They argued against the issuance of a recruitment notice for fresh candidates without considering their claims.
Findings of Court:
Petitioners were never employed by JKSPDC but by a private contractor; their claims for absorption lack merit.
Issues: Whether petitioners have a legal right to absorption in JKSPDC and if the recruitment notice is arbitrary.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioners failed to establish an employer-employee relationship with JKSPDC, and the recruitment notice was a valid policy decision.
Result: TA dismissed.
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 163/2009 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/534/20220 by the Registry of this Tribunal.
2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court with following prayer:
a) “to issue direction to the respondents to absorb/adjust the petitioners in JKSPDC Ltd. against the available vacant posts of Technician (Electric), on which the petitioners are working in Baglihar Hydroelectric Project, Chanderkote, by issuance of writ of mandamus; and
b) to quash Appointment Notice No.DIP/J-974-P dated 06.01.2009, issued by Managing Director, JKSPDC Ltd. by which the applications have been invited by the J&K State Power Development Corporation, Ltd., for the posts of Technician (Electric), by issuance of writ of Certiorari; and
c) to issue direction to the respondents restraining them to oust the petitioners from the posts of Technician (Electric), after taking over the Project, by the JKSPDC Ltd., by issuance of writ of prohibition; and
d) to declare the Appointment Notice No.DIP/J-975-P dated 06.01.2009 and act of the respondents by which they have not absorbed/adjusted the petitioners in JKSPDC Ltd. against the available vacant posts of Technician (Electric), as ultra vires, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of law, by issuance of writ of mandamus; and
e) Any other appropriate writ, order or directions as the Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.”
3. The facts of the case as averred by the petitioners in their pleadings, are as follows: -
a) The petitioners are permanent residents of Jammu & Kashmir and respectable citizens of India, whose legal and fundamental rights are guaranteed under the Constitution of India. They are ITI-trained technicians who have been serving as Technicians (Electric) in the Baglihar Hydroelectric Project, Chanderkote, since the years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. The Jammu & Kashmir State Power Development Corporation Ltd. (JKSPDC Ltd.), a government enterprise, is taking over the project. The petitioners possess the necessary qualifications and have gained extensive experience over the years. However, despite being eligible and fulfilling all requirements, the respondents have not considered their cases for absorption or adjustment in the corporation.
b) The petitioners had earlier approached the respondents through representations for their adjustment as Electricians in the JKSPDC, but their requests were not entertained. Instead, JKSPDC issued an Appointment Notice dated 06.01.2009, inviting applications for multiple posts, including Technician (Electric), without considering the petitioners for absorption. The recruitment notice mentioned 17 posts under open merit and several reserved category posts, for which the petitioners were qualified. The petitioners have been continuously and efficiently performing their duties in the project for several years, with the legitimate expectation of being permanently absorbed once the project is taken over by JKSPDC. The denial of their absorption violates their right to equality and fair treatment under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
c) It is pertinent to note that in similar circumstances, the Government had earlier absorbed employees of the Milk Federation, Tawi Scooter, and Kalakote Coal Unit into government departments upon their respective closures or takeovers. The petitioners argue that a similar principle should apply in their case, as they are employees of a project now taken over by a government enterprise. Their exclusion from permanent employment despite having requisite qualifications and years of experience is arbitrary, discriminatory, and against natural justice.
d) The respondents have failed to justify their decision to recruit fresh candidates while disregarding the
