The failure to consider legitimate claims for regularization does not warrant redressal when procedural compliance is evident; repeated litigation is discouraged.

ORDER

Per Hon’ble Mr. M.S. Latif, Member (Judl.)

The writ petition (SWP No.608 of 2019), having been filed initially before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in the year 2019, came to be transferred to the CAT, Jammu Bench vide order dated 14.08.2020 and accordingly numbered as T.A.8707/2020. Thereafter when CAT Srinagar Bench was commissioned, the matter was transferred to this Bench. The case was first listed before this Bench of CAT on 01.04.2022.

2. Through the medium of instant TA, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:-

“(i) Certiorari, quashing thereby the impugned order bearing No.1380-DRDK of 2018 dated 15.12.2018, to the effect that it effects the legitimate right of the petitioner to claim regularization at the hands of the respondents being the daily wager of 1987.

(ii) Mandamus, commanding thereby to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as daily wager on the basis of his initial engagement order and on the basis of court order dated 17.03.2011 when respondents were directed to allow the petitioner to serve as daily wager till his claim for regularization is considered, by releasing wages to which the petitioner is entitled.

(iii) Mandamus commanding thereby to the respondents to get the services of the petitioner regularized against any available post or in alternate to get the post created by accommodating the petitioner in the department so as to get the problem resolved for all times to come.

(iv) Mandamus, commanding thereby to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner since 1987 as daily wager by getting him regularized w.e.f. 1994 which is the due date for petitioner’s regularization to get him at par with his counter parts as per recommendation of wage committee's communication dated 30.08.2005 by paying the petitioner regular salary.

(v) Mandamus, commanding thereby the respondents to maintain the service record of the petitioner by getting him regularized as class-IV employee on the pattern his counter parts are regularized on the basis of above quoted communication dated 30.08.2005.

(v) Any other order or direction, which the Hon'ble court deems just and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.”

3. Alongside the main reliefs, the petitioner seeks interim relief that till the disposal of the main writ petition, the operation of the impugned order bearing No.1380-DRDK of 2018 dated 15.12.2018 be stayed with the direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as daily wager.

4. The facts of the case, as enunciated by the petitioner in the instant TA, are reproduced as under:-

(i) The petitioner was initially engaged in the Office of the Block Development Officer, Shangus vide order No.SB/721-28 dated 23.08.1987 as daily wager till further orders. It was also mentioned in the order that wages will be paid subject to availability of funds. Vide another order No.DRDA/B/C/Sgr(1)/18 dated 30.08.2005 issued by Project Officer, DRDA Budgam, pursuant to which case of 18 daily wagers was recommended to the Director, Rural Development, Kashmir, Srinagar for regularization wherein the name of the petitioner was at Sl.No.17.

(ii) The petitioner filed an application dated 22.11.2010 to the Office of Director Rural Development wherein he requested for his regularization in terms of SRO 64 of 1994 , but application of the petitioner was neither considered nor rejected. Being aggrieved, petitioner approached the Hon’ble High Court through the medium of SWP No.539/2011 which was disposed of on 17.03.2011 with a direction to