AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
(Per:- Sanjeev Gupta, Judicial Member)
With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal today itself.
In this Original Application (in short O.A.), the applicant has inter-alia prayed for the following reliefs:-
“a. Seeking to quash impugned Govt. Order No. 23-DSEJ of 2026 dated 09.03.2006, to the extent, the same grants promotion to the applicant as Jr. Assistant w.e.f. 20.10.2025 instead of 31.07.2019.
b. Commanding and directing the respondents to treat the promotion of the applicant to the post of Jr. Assistant as effective from the year 2019, more specifically w.e.f. 31.07.2019, i.e. from the date the vacancies were available and the applicant was placed on incharge basis;
c. Commanding and directing the respondents to fix the seniority of the applicant accordingly, by giving effect to the promotion of the applicant against the post of Jr. Assistant from 31.07.2019.
d. Commanding and directing the respondents to grant all consequential benefits including monetary benefits as may be deemed fit by Hon’ble Tribunal after giving effect to the promotion of the applicant against the post of Jr. Assistant from 31.07.2019.”
The sole grievance of the applicant is that applicant, in terms of the impugned order dated 09.03.2026 has been promoted as Junior Assistant on the recommendation of Divisional Level Promotion Committee w.e.f. 20.10.2025 and not from 31.07.2019, when applicant was placed as incharge Junior Assistant in his own grade and pay against available vacancy, pending clearance by the DPC.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the case in hand is squarely covered by the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Suraj Prakash Gupta Vs. State of J&K and others (2000) 7 SCC 561, and this case can be disposed of in the light of above referred judgement.
On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General was unable to point out from the record that the case of the applicant is not covered by aforesaid decision, rather, as per reply filed to the O.A., it is admitted that on the basis of type test and vacancy position, vide order No. DSWJ/Estt/5861-63/19 dated 31.07.2019, applicant was placed as I/c Jr. Assistant in his own pay and grade, with entitlement of charge allowance as under rules and posted in the office of District Programme Officer ICDS Project, Samba against available vacancy.
Heard and considered.
It is no more res integra that where an employee has been working continuously for several years, without interruption and regularization follows later, the past service of such an employee cannot be disregarded for regularization and consequential benefits. In other words, where an employee has been appointed temporarily to a higher post and later confirmed on the same post, the period of service rendered before confirmation must be counted towards seniority and other benefits, unless specifically prohibited by rules.
This principle has also been recognized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suraj Parkash Gupta (supra), wherein it has been held that retrospective regularization of temporary, adhoc or stop gap service is permissible, when an employee has served for a long period for the period without any fault on his part.
Accordingly, this O.A. is allowed and disposed of with the following directions:-
The impugned order dated 09.03.2026, qua the applicant is hereby quashed to the extent the same grants promotion to the applicant as Jr. Assistants w.e.f. 20.10.2025.
The respondents are directed to accord consideration for regularization of the services of the applicant as Junior Assistant retrospectively w.e.f. 31.07.2019 i.e. the date on which, he was appointed to the post of Jr. Assistant on incharge basis.
The respondents shall extend all consequential benefits including seniority and monetary benefits to the applicant within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
With these observations, O.A. stands disposed of.
There shall be no orders so as to costs.