Suraya Jabeen vs Union Territory Of Jk And Ors

Through the medium of the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking setting aside of order dated 30th of December, 2020, as passed by the Central

Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunalâ€​) in T.A. No.62/9285/2020 [WP(C) No.3069/2019].

The background facts, put in a nutshell, leading to the filing of this petition are that the petitioner had filed a Writ petition before the learned Single

Bench of this Court, being WP(C) No.3069/2019, seeking a direction upon the respondents to regularize her services retrospectively from the year

1989 in light of Government Order No. 1220-GAD of 1989, on the analogy of similarly situated persons. Thereafter, upon coming into force of the

Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019; thereby vesting jurisdiction to hear service matters to the Tribunal, the aforesaid Writ petition came to

be transferred to the Tribunal in terms of order dated 27th of October, 2020. The learned Tribunal, upon consideration of the matter and in terms of

order dated 30th of December, 2020, disposed of the case on the following terms:

“…..

Looking to the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant, the TA is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the

case of the applicant for regularization in accordance with the relevant schemes and acts applicable in their case. This exercise be

completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by way of reasoned and speaking order. The

applicants may also be intimated regarding the decision taken in this regard by the respondents. It is once again reiterated that the

consideration for regularization of services of the applicant shall be considered by the respondent strictly in terms of relevant schemes and

rules.â€​

It is this order that has been assailed by the petitioner before this Court through the medium of the instant petition.

Mr Shuja-ul-Haq Tantray, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner, in the aforesaid petition (registered as TA

No.62/9285/2020 before the learned Tribunal), had not sought a direction upon the respondents for regularizing her services, but had, in fact, sought a

direction upon the respondents to consider her case for regularization of her services retrospectively on the analogy of similarly situated employees. It

is contended that the services of the petitioner stand already regularized vide Government Order No. 129 SWD of 2014 dated 2nd of June, 2014, but

since the effect of such regularization was given prospectively, while as her colleagues in the Department, whose services were also regularized

alongwith the petitioner, were given retrospective effect of such regularization, compelling the petitioner to file the Writ petition. In this context, the

learned counsel has proceeded to state that the order impugned passed by the learned Tribunal is not only bad in law, but same has also been passed

without application of mind.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, gone through the pleadings on record and considered the matter, we are of the view that the

learned Tribunal has clearly erred in directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of her services when, as a

matter of fact, the services of the petitioner stand already regularized vide Order No.129 SWD of 2014 dated 2nd of June, 2014. The petitioner was

seeking retrospective effect of the regularization of her services on the analogy of some similarly situated employees, whose services were also

regularized alongwith the petitioner. The petitioner had also given the details of the said similarly situated employees in her petition. That being so, the

order dated 30th of December, 2020, as passed by the learned Tribunal, is found to be against the records, as a corollary thereto, same is hereby set

aside. Consequently, the TA No.62/9285/2020 [originally WP(C) No.3069/2019] of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal is allowed and the

respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of her services in the respondent Department retrospectively, on the

same analogy as has been adopted by them in the case of other similarly situated employees in tune with the mandate of Government Order No.1220-

GAD of 1989, of course, if the case of the petitioner is similar to such employees. Respondents to accord consideration to the case of the petitioner, as

aforesaid, and pass appropriate orders with respect thereto without two months from today.

Writ petition disposed of as above, alongwith all connected CM(s).

A copy of this judgment be forthwith send to the learned Tribunal so that the TA, which stands allowed by this Court hereinabove, is consigned to

records as per rules.