STATE OF JANDK Vs. MAHARAJ KRISHAN BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this appeal relates to the effective date of regularisation of the respondents.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the respondents, fourteen in number, were engaged as Daily Rated Workers' in the Power Development Department on different dates between 1979 and 1989. The proposal for regularisation of their services under SRO 64 of 1994 was considered by the Empowered Committee constituted in terms of the Rules, in its 141st meeting on April 4, 2002. The Empowered Committee decided to create a total of 70 posts including 20 posts in the Power Development Department. The decision was communicated vide Memo No. 409 on April 23, 2002. On June 6, 2002, the appointing authority i, e. Chief Engineer, M&RE Wing, Jammu, issued order regularising the services of the respondents from the dates they had completed seven years of continuous service on daily wage as per details mentioned in the chart enclosed as Annexure-A to the order. A modification order, however, was issued on January 6, 2003 directing that the regularisation of daily wagers shall be deemed to be sanctioned with effect from June 6, 2002 i.e. the date of the order. The order dated January 6, 2003 also referred to another order dated July 16, 2002 in respect of one Rajinder Tickoo, with which we are not concerned in this case.

(3.) The respondents filed writ petition, SWP No. 31/2003, challenging the said order dated January 6, 2003. The learned single Judge observed that in terms of the decision of the Empowered Committee, though the posts were created prospectively, retrospective benefit was to be given from the date of their continuous employment after necessary verification and therefore, making regularisation effective from the date of issue 5 of the regularisation order dated June 6, 2002 was not correct. The learned single Judge also observed that no reason whatsoever had been assigned in the impugned order taking away the benefit of retrospective regularisation. The learned Judge also took view that the retrospective benefit having been given by the Empowered Committee with the approval of the Finance Department, the Chief Engineer was not competent to take away the benefit. The learned Judge also accepted the submission of the counsel for the petitioners that the impugned order was in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned Judge accordingly passed the impugned order dated October 31, 2003, with direction to the respondents i.e. the appellants herein, to allow retrospective benefit of regularisation to the writ petitioners from the date each one of them had completed seven years of service and to give consequential benefits thereof to them with effect from the said dates. The State of Jammu and Kashmir and others have come in letters patent appeal against the said order of learned single Judge.