MOHAMMAD AMIN RATHER Vs. UT OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing Order No. 9033-34 dtd. 24/12/2020, whereby their claim for being brought at par with respondents 6 to 9 as permanent casual labourers came to be rejected. The petitioners further seek issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to accord them the same treatment and benefits as were extended in favour of respondents 6 to 9 vide Order No. 700-02 dtd. 30/6/2014.

(2.) The case projected by the petitioners is that they have been working as seasonal labourers in the respondent department since the year 1998 and are similarly situated to respondents 6 to 9. According to the petitioners, despite rendering long years of service, they have not been considered for adjustment or regular engagement, whereas respondents 6 to 9, who were identically placed, were brought within the cadre of permanent casual labourers.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners argued that the impugned action of the respondents is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as the respondents have created an artificial classification amongst similarly situated employees without any rational basis. It is contended that once respondents 6 to 9 were granted the benefit of year-round engagement and permanent casual labour status, denial of the same treatment to the petitioners amounts to hostile discrimination.