Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Nov 22: High Court today quashed the rejection order for regularizing the services of need basis employees in Sericulture Department and directed the authorities to reconsider the case of these employees in tune with earlier directions.
“The writ petition is allowed and the order impugned bearing No. DS/LS/2016/516-18 dated 18-05-2018, shall stand quashed and by a writ of mandamus, the respondents are directed to re-consider the case of the petitioners in tune with the directions passed by this Court on 20.08.2015, on the basis of material available on record”, Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey directed.
Petitioner-employees in the instant second round of litigation were seeking the quashing of order bearing No. DS/LS/2016/516-18 dated 18-05-2018 whereby their claim for regularization has been rejected.
They were seeking direction from the Court to direct the respondents to implement the judgment of this Court passed on August 20, 2015 in its letter and spirit by forming their legal obligation and duty of fairness by terminating, discrimination and denial of accord of regularization under SRO-64 of 1994 vis-à-vis the treatment of regularization accorded to their counterparts who belonging to the same service category and class.
The impugned rejection order reveals that the petitioners’ continuation has been disputed and their engagement is stated to be purely on needs basis as and when required for nursery operations in different nurseries for the period for which they have been paid and are being disengaged as soon as time bound nursery operations are over.
It is on August 20 court had directed the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners are par with the similarly situated persons and have been regularized in terms of SRO 64 of 1994 with the condition in case the petitioners are at par with the said similarly situated persons.
The respondents have considered the claim of the petitioners on the touchstone of applicable rules and consideration resulted into rejection of their claim. The petitioners having questioned the rejection, have placed on record instead their continuation orders, the orders of some other daily wagers, whose serves are stated to be regularized on the said set of facts.
Justice Magrey while deciding the petition of these employees said the Court cannot give the benefit of regularization to the petitioners on the strength what has been given to others but may direct the respondents to give the benefit of regularization to the petitioners on the touchstone of SRO 64 of 1994.
“Court is not satisfied with consideration having been accorded to the petitioners in tune with the final orders passed on 20.08.2015” and as such directed for reconsideration of the case of petitioners for regularization,” Justice Magrey said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel