HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Reserved on: 02.12.2025 Pronounced on 11.12.2025 Uploaded on 11.12.2025 Whether the operative part or full judgment is pronounced: Full CJ Court:

WP(C) No. 3402/2025 UT of J&K and others …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)

Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG v/s …. Respondent(s)

Som Raj Through: Mr. Abirash Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE.

JUDGMENT

-

‘Oswal J’

1. The respondent instituted SWP No. 1240/2002 in the year 2002, seeking directions to the petitioners (then respondents 1 to 3) to retrospectively regularize his services with effect from 01.09.1996, in terms of SRO 64 of 1994 dated March 24, 1994, and to release the unpaid wages payable to him. The said writ petition came to be disposed of in terms of order 14.11.2002, directing the respondents, petitioners 1 to 3 herein, to examine the record with regard to the engagement and continuation of the respondent as Daily Rated/Seasonal Labourer and if the respondent was found to have been engaged and continuously working as Daily Rated Worker, after the examination of the record, the petitioners 1 to 3 i.e. respondents therein, were directed to pass appropriate orders for regularization the services of the respondent in terms of SRO 64 of 1994.

2. Despite the respondent’s repeated requests for regularization, the petitioners failed to take any action in the matter. Their only actions were internal communications regarding the collection of the respondent’s service records, which were necessary to comply with the directions issued in the judgment dated November 14, 2002, in SWP No. 1240/2002. While the respondent continued working with the petitioners, his salary was stopped with effect from May 2018. Subsequent to this, and despite his further repeated requests, the petitioners again failed to take any substantive action beyond inter-departmental communications, which nonetheless unequivocally proved that the respondent was discharging his duties as a 'Daily Wager’.

3. Faced with this situation, the respondent filed a subsequent writ petition, WP(C) No. 2897/2019. The respondent sought the regularization of his services under SRO 64 of 1994 effective from October 8, 1998, the date he completed seven years of service as a Daily-Rated Worker, along with all consequential benefits. He also sought the release of his pending wages with effect from May 2018. The respondent asserted that the petitioners had willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions of the learned Writ Court passed in SWP No. 1240/2002, and had simultaneously withheld his due wages since May 2018. It was asserted by the respondent that his case was squarely covered by the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in “State of J&K vs. Mushtaq Ahmad Sohail, (2012) 4 JKJ 1051, wherein it was observed that if a casual labouer is continued for a fairly long spell, say two or three years, a presumption may arise that there is a regular need of his service.

4. The said writ petition came to be transferred to Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu (for short, the Tribunal), and re-numbered as Transferred Application No. 2084/2020.

5. In their status report/response before the learned Tribunal, the petitioners stated that the pending wages for the period December 2019 to October 2020 could not be paid to the respondent because the relevant muster sheets were not available in the office record. The petitioners asserted that the muster sheets are the basic documents required to verify whether the respondent actually performed work during that time or not. They also confirmed that the respondent is now receiving his salary regularly.

6. The learned Tribunal vide judgment dated 11.03.2025 allowed the T.A preferred by the respondent and directed the petitioners to regularize the services of the respondent under SRO 64 of 1994 with all the consequential benefits with effect from 08.10.1998, when he completed 7 years