J U D G M E N T

(Per Moksha, J)

1. This intra court appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 07.03.2017 hereinafter referred to as (“impugned judgment”) passed by the Writ Court in a writ petition bearing SWP No. 517/2004, whereby, the writ petition of the petitioner/appellant herein, has been dismissed being without any merit.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. The case of the appellant, precisely, is that he had been engaged as adhoc Junior Assistant in the respondent department way back in the year 1995 and after having put in long years of service as such, was treated as a temporary employee. In terms of Government Order No. 1285-GAD of 2001 dated 06.11.2001, which provided that all adhoc appointments made till the issuance of said order shall be considered for regularization after completion of seven years subject to certain conditions mentioned in the said Government order, thereby making the appellant eligible for regularization. However, he was not regularized pursuant to such Government order. It further appears that the Government of Jammu & Kashmir, subsequently, passed yet another order bearing No. 168-GAD of 2004 dated 09.02.2004 which inter alia provided that all adhoc appointments made after 28th July, 1989 and continued till the date of issuance of the said order and also those adhocees who were appointed by the General Administration Department or with the approval of the General Administration Department and continued till August, 2002 or thereafter shall be converted into contractual appointments w.e.f. 01.02.2004 which shall subsist till 31.12.2004 or till such selection against these posts is made whichever is earlier.

3. The order dated 09.02.2004 could not be implemented as it was challenged in various writ petitions. The petitioner-appellant also chose to file a writ petition against the said order. Since the subject matter of these writ petitions was similar, therefore, all such petitions were heard and decided together by the Single Bench of this Court at its Jammu Wing reported as Thomas Masih v. State of J&K, 2004 (2) JKJ 197 (HC). The petitioner-appellant’s writ petition was decided later in time, as it was segregated from the batch of writ petitions decided on 05.04.2004, on the request of learned counsel that the subject matter of the writ petition is not similar to the batch of petitions being decided. The decision, however, in the writ petition of the petitioner-appellant was also the same, as the court was of the opinion that the said writ petition is squarely covered by the decision dated 05.04.2004 rendered in Thomas Masih supra. Feeling aggrieved of the writ court order, the petitioner-appellant challenged the same by way of a Letters Patent Appeal. During the pendency of said appeal, a legislation known as the J&K Civil Services (Special Provisions Act, 2010) hereinafter referred to as an “Act of 2010” came to be enacted which provided for regularization of adhoc, consolidated, and contractual employees in the Government Departments of the State.

4. The petitioner-appellant’s service came to be regularized vide order No. 1356-

LD (Estt) of 2016 dated 31.03.2016 in terms of the provisions of the Act of 2010. Since the appellant had filed LPA against the judgment of the writ court which was pending consideration when the appellant was regularized, the appellant sought permission to challenge his regularization order also by amending his writ petition, which was granted.

5. The Appellant by the medium of the litigation that he has indulged in has tried to project that his adhoc appointment was converted into temporary appointment in terms of the corrigendum issued to his appointment order vide order bearing endorsement No. UC/LD(Estt)/P/SAZ/95 dated 17.01.1996 in terms of the Rule

3 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Temporary Service Rules) 1961, therefore, he is deemed to be a quasi permanent employee after rendering three years service on the post. This is what had prompted the appellant to