STATE Vs. ANURADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent - Ms. Anuradha D/o Sh. Charan Dass R/o Landar, Block Panchari, Udhampur, claiming to have been appointed as daily rated worker on 25th January, 1994 filed a writ petition registered in SWP No. 697/2001 praying for a direction to the respondent-appellants herein, to regularize her service. The writ petition was disposed of vide Order dated 12-10-2001 with the direction to the respondent to accord consideration to regularization of service of the petitioner. The appellants vide Order dated 23-04-2005, on according consideration to the respondent's regularization, rejected her claim. The reasons given in the aforesaid order, for rejecting the claim were that the respondent was engaged as casual labour and not a daily wager and that the respondent could not claim benefit under SRO 64 of 1994. The respondent is said to have not completed seven years of service as a Daily Wager, so as to enable her to claim regularization under the aforementioned SRO.

(2.) The respondent assailed the Order dated 23-04-2005 in writ petition registered as SWP No.605/2005. The stand taken in earlier writ petition i.e. SWP No.697/2001 was reiterated in the fresh petition. It was insisted that the respondent having been appointed as a Daily Wager and allowed to continue as a Daily Wager for more than seven years, was entitled to regularization of service in terms of SRO 64 of 1994 and that the order declining her benefit of regularization was unsustainable inasmuch as it did not take notice of the facts discernible from the respondent's service record and the rules as applicable to the facts of the case.

(3.) The stand taken by the appellants was that the respondent was engaged as ''casual labour'' and not a daily wager and her engagement was not uninterrupted. It was pleaded that the respondent after her engagement as a casual labour, was not paid wages for a particular period and thus, the respondent did not have uninterrupted service of seven years to her credit.