TILAK RAJ Vs. HOUSING BOARD, J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions dealing with the similar nature of controversy shall stand disposed of vide this common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners in writ petition 517/2001 submit that they came to be engaged by the respondents initially for a period of 89 days on daily wage basis in the year 1994. It is submitted that this engagement has continued from time to time. Similar assertion has been made by the petitioners of writ petition SWP 615/2001. The dates on which the petitioners in Writ petition 615/2001 came to be engaged have been mentioned in para 3 of the writ petition. So far as writ petitioner in SWP 651/2001 is concerned, it is submitted that he came to be engaged initially in Dec. 1993. In para 4 of the said writ petition, it is submitted that he is continuing as a daily wager from Ist Dec., 1993 till date The petitioners have approached this Court with a plea that after having worked with the respondent J&K Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) for more than seven years they are entitled to regularisation of their services. So far as the continuous working of the petitioners is concerned, there is no dispute. The dispute is only as to whether their services have actually been brought to an end, in pursuance of Government directions given vide Order No. 144 -GAD of 2001 dt. 2nd Feb. 2001, According to the petitioners, they have continued to service. For this reliance is being placed on interim orders passed in the above said petitions on l6th March 2001, 30th March 2001 and 4th April 2001. Respondent, however, submit that the relationship of master and servant was brought to an end and the petitioners are no longer in services. The petitioners, however, as indicated above, challenged this aspect of the matter. They are by placing reliance on an order passed by the Managing Director on 15th May 2001. The above order takes notice of some interim order having been passed by this Court and permitted these persons to continue in service on the terms and conditions specified in the above said order.

(3.) THE above aspect of the matter need not to be elaborated further. The issues as projected and the questions which are required to be gone into in the present petitions are as under: (i) Whether the petitioners, who came to be appointed in a year i.e. after Government Order No. 26 -F of 1994 dated 31.1.1994, can be permitted to continue? (ii) Whether the services of the petitioners could be brought to an end in pursuance of Government. Order No. 144 -GAD of 2001 dated 2.2.2001? (iii) Whether the Government orders, issued from time to time ipso facto become applicable to the Board or the Board has to adopt these orders by passing separate resolutions ? (iv) As to what is the effect of Rule 10 of the J&K Daily Rated Workers/Work Charged Employees (Regularisation) Rules, 1994. Rule 10 of the Rules, referred to above is to the effect that all the existing Rules, Regulations and orders except Government Order No. 26 -F of 1994 dt. 31st Jan 1994, shall stand repealed.