Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashes the writ petition filed by ‘daily rated casual labourers’ against the Public Health Engineering Department at Jammu

Must Read

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to...

Onus on Petitioner To Show Unassailable Facts: Delhi High Court

In the case of Rhythm Jain v National Testing Agency, the Delhi High Court mentioned that in such petitions the...

Under-Trial/Convicted Persons Do Not Have Absolute Right To Parole in Light of Coronavirus : Bombay High Court

An important judgment was given by the Division Bench of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court concerning the...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Asks State To File Reply To Examine Whether Privacy Rights of an Individual Can Be Violated by Issuing an Executive...

A Writ Petition was instituted by an individual for violation of his fundamental rights by the State before the...

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding...

Follow us

Hon’ble Mr Justice Tashi Rabstan of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Jammu, over video-conferencing, heard the case of Chaman Lal & Ors. v. State of J&K and Ors. The petitioners here seek the court to quash the order given by the respondent who is the Chief Engineer of Public Health Engineering, wherein regularization of their services was rejected. They also seek an order by the court releasing their unpaid wages by the respondents.

Facts of the Case

The writ petition was filed by 17 members hailing from the District of Kathua, who was engaged as Daily Rated Labourers in Civil as well as Mechanical Divisions of PHE, Kathua from October 1994 to January 2000. Ever since they have been discharging their duties which was indeed certified by the respondents in the years 2005 and 2010.

It is alleged that despite the petitioners making several representations, the respondents did not regularize their services. Thus, back then 26 members filed a writ petition that was disposed of on 01-11-2013 directing the respondents to regularize their services.

However, Respondent No. 2 vide Order No. PHEJ/GE/04/E of 2014 dated 04-01-2014 impugned, that rejected the claim of petitioners. These are the facts from the writ petition.

Arguments Of The Petitioners

Mrs Veenu Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners argues that:

  • The respondents did not consider the case of petitioners in an effective or bonafide manner.
  • The respondents did not consider the fact that the petitioners were working there from the dates of their respective engagements without any break in service, thus, the action of the respondents is per se illegal and arbitrary.
  • Even though the State Government has framed various policies for regularization of ad hoc/daily rated workers/casual labourers from time to time, the benefits are not reaching the petitioners, even when they rendered more than qualified service. Therefore, he argued that they should be entitled to the regularization of services.
  • It was further stated that the respondents have not paid the legitimate wages to the petitioners which they are entitled to.

Arguments Of The Respondents

Mr K.D.S Kotwal, the learned counsel for the respondents argued that:

  • The objections were filed on 09-07-2014 by the respondents against the petition filed by the petitioners back then.
  • The report submitted by the concerned Executive Engineer clearly shows the period specifically for which the petitioners were engaged for work.
  • The petitioners, at present, are not working in the department and they had left the department since 2003, 2004 and 2005 on their own.
  • Regarding wages, the claim of the petitioners does not sustain for any monetary benefit because wages of the petitioners were calculated on an individual basis and were deposited before this court.

Court’s Analysis

After hearing both the parties and after the perusal of the writ file, the Court analysed the following:

  • The respondents have not denied the fact that the petitioners were engaged as Daily Rated Labourers from October 1994 to January 2000.
  • The respondents contend that all the petitioners left the department on their own since the years 2003, 2004 and 2005.
  • The petitioners themselves have failed to establish their claim nor did they produce any record of them discharging their duties without any break, even after the year 2005 to the date of filing the instant petition.
  • The details of the impugned order reveal that none of the petitioners worked after March 2005.
  • The Court further pointed out Section 5 of Jammu & Kashmir Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010 which says that regularization of ad hoc or contractual or consolidated appointees will be done if the following conditions are fulfilled:
  • that he has been appointed against a clear vacancy or post;
  • that he continues as such on the appointed day;
  • that he possessed the requisite qualification and eligibility for the post on the date of his initial appointment on ad hoc or contractual or consolidated basis as prescribed under the recruitment rules governing the service or post;
  • that no disciplinary or criminal proceedings are pending against him on the appointed day; and
  • that he has completed seven years of service as such the appointed day.
  • The Court said that the above section does not apply to them as these petitioners do not fall under J & K Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010 as they all left the department on their own before April 2005, neither do they fall under SRO 64 OF 1994 which is applicable only if the labourers are engaged with work before 31st March 1994, whereas these workers joined the work from September 1994.

Court’s Decision

The Court did not find any merit in the petition.

However, it directs the respondents to clear the unpaid wages, if any, within four weeks from the date of the judgment. The judicial Registrar is also directed to release the wages in favour of the eligible petitioners as per their entitlement after proper verification and identification if the same has been deposited in the Registry of the Court in the form of cheque by the respondents.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to the Levinson family in punitive...

Onus on Petitioner To Show Unassailable Facts: Delhi High Court

In the case of Rhythm Jain v National Testing Agency, the Delhi High Court mentioned that in such petitions the onus to prove the facts...

Under-Trial/Convicted Persons Do Not Have Absolute Right To Parole in Light of Coronavirus : Bombay High Court

An important judgment was given by the Division Bench of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court concerning the constitutionality of Rule 19 of...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Asks State To File Reply To Examine Whether Privacy Rights of an Individual Can Be Violated by Issuing an Executive...

A Writ Petition was instituted by an individual for violation of his fundamental rights by the State before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The...

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by the Exporters Association before the...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -