High CourtsSingle Bench(2014) 06 J&K CK 0028

Bilal Ahmad Mir vs Union of India and Others

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 4 June 2014 · Citation: (2014) 4 JKJ 56

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J
CASE NUMBER
Service Writ Petition (SWP) No. 2276 Of 2013

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 405 words

Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J.—The case set up by the petitioner is that he was engaged as a consolidated paid worker in 1998. Later on

nature of the engagement was first changed to that of semi skilled worker, then to skilled worker. He has been working with the respondents for

last 15 years but has not been permanently absorbed. Respondents have invited applications from eligible candidates for various posts including

skilled support staff for which petitioner claims to be eligible having the prescribed qualification. Having crossed the age limit has moved application

for age relaxation, same has remained to be relaxed, as a result thereof he could not participate in the selection process.

2.

Respondents, in their reply, have stated that the petitioner is being deployed by the Labour Agency. Labourers are being engaged through

reputed agency by a contract awarded to the agency/agencies. The benefits, which are available to the labourers, are being paid regularly,

therefore, there is no question of his absorption. For direct recruitment to any post, ICAR rules/guidelines are being followed. Petitioner too has a

right to apply subject to eligibility.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the earlier process initiated is almost complete, merit list has been prepared, now it shall

be too late in the day for the petitioner to claim consideration as against those posts. Further added that afresh number of such posts are likely to

be advertised, petitioner shall be at liberty to apply for the same.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may compete for the fresh posts but he has already crossed the age limit, he has

been working with the respondents for last 15 years, now all other doors are closed for him, he cannot compete anywhere, his long association of

15 years has helped him in gaining lot of experience, he shall be an asset for the respondents experience-wise, therefore, interests of the petitioner

may be directed to be protected.

5.

In view of the rival submissions, it shall be quite appropriate for the petitioner to apply as and when fresh posts will be advertised. Suffice it to

observe that in view of 15 years of experience of the petitioner, his application as against said posts, when advertised, irrespective of age bar shall

be entertained and in case he makes grade, relaxation of age in accordance with rules shall also be favourably considered. Petition accordingly

disposed of.