Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Robkar vs Sanjeev Verma And Another on 1 March, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
Sr. No. 1
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
ROBSW No. 10/2023 c/w
CCP(S) No. 373/2019
Robkar ..... petitioner (s)
Balbir Singh and others
Through :- Mr. Abhirash Sharma Advocate.
V/s
Sanjeev Verma and another .....Respondent(s)
Manoj Kumar Dwivedi and others
Through :- Mr. Amit Gupta AAG
Mr. Eishan Dadeechi G.A.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
ORDER
(01.03.2024) 1 Judgment passed by this Court, which has since attained finality, has been partially complied with. Consequent upon the creation of five posts of Helpers, the petitioners have been regularized as Helpers w.e.f 26.12.2023. The compliance submitted by the Commissioner/Secretary to Government, GAD as well as the Forest Department is not a complete compliance of the judgment dated 11.10.2002 passed in LPASW No.412/2002. For the benefit of respondents and for their better understanding, the operative portion of the judgment is reproduced hereunder:
"A perusal of writ petition makes it apparent that so far as Government Order No. 1285-GAD of 2001 dated 6th Nov. 2001 is concerned, this was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and as such , this aspect of the matter was not considered and the same could not be. This was because, as indicated above, the fact that the above said Government order stands issued was not brought o the notice of the learned Single Judge. So far as the appellants are concerned, they came to be engaged in the year 1994 and 1995. Therefore, their cases would be covered by the Government order dated 6th Nov. 2001. The appellants would be allowed to continue in service and their claims would be considered for regularization as and when they complete seven years of service. They would also be paid their wages for the period they have 2 actually worked. In case, the wages are not released and ultimately it is found that something is due then the appellants would be entitled to interest at the rate of 6 per cent and this would be payable by the person on whose account the delay occurs".
2 From a reading of the judgment, in particular, the operative portion reproduced hereinabove, it is abundantly clear that the petitioners have been held entitled to regularization of their services with effect from the date they complete 7 years of service. It seems that the petitioners have been appointed in the year 1994-95 and, therefore, they would complete seven years service in the year 2001/2002. The respondents have failed to appreciate the import of the judgment passed by this Court and have, thus, issued the order of regularization of the petitioners prospectively w.e.f 26.12.2023. As a matter of fact, General Administration Department having failed to create the posts retrospectively, has rendered itself liable for contempt. This Court has already framed Robkar. However, before the same is taken to logical end, one more opportunity is granted to the respondents, in particular, the General Administration Department as also the Forest Department to comply with the judgment in letter and spirit and to ensure by the next date of hearing that the benefit of regularization is given to the petitioners with effect from the date they have completed seven years of service as is mandated by the Division Bench judgment dated 11.10.2002. Six weeks' time is granted to do the needful, failing which, the Commissioner Secretary to Government, GAD and the Secretary, Finance Department shall appear in person on the next date of hearing.
List on 26.04.2024.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE Jammu 01.03.2024 Sanjeev