Srinagar, Feb 07: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh directed the authorities to proceed with the regularization of contractual employees working in the JK State Cable Car Corporation Limited at Gulmarg Gondola on the touchstone of the same policy which has been made applicable in the past by virtue of order issued on December 18, 2013.
Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal directed the authorities to prepare and submit the agenda positively within a period of one week for regularization of the contractual employees on the touchstone of the same policy which has been made applicable in the past with respect to the similarly situated contractual employees, who were regularized by virtue of order issued on December 18, 2013 and place the same afresh before the Administrative Department for its final approval.
The court was hearing a plea filed by contractual employees of JK State Cable Car Corporation Limited at Gulmarg Gondola seeking regularization of their services on the analogy of similarly situated employees.
The court noted that a plea was filed before it in 2017 and on the very first day of hearing, it had directed the respondents to consider the claim of petitioners for regularization at par with similarly situated persons under rules governing the field.
“Till date the aforesaid order passed by this Court has not been implemented in its letter and spirit and the petitioners continue to be discriminated viz-a-viz same class,” the court said.
The court while asking the respondents counsel that how and under what circumstances the similarly situated contractual employees were regularized in the past just after two years, on which the counsel could not reply effectively and on the other hand he submitted that the regularization of the said employees was a past act and closed event.
The court noted that the counsel, however, failed to distinguish that how they constitute a different clause viz-a-viz the petitioners and could not justify the inaction viz-a-viz petitioners on the same analogy as has been done in the case of similarly situated employees in the past.
Justice Nargal pointed out that counsel failed to justify the inaction on part of respondents with respect to petitioners who are similarly situated and in whose favour, there is a clear cut recommendation by the respondents, but the respondents have turned deaf ear to the same.
The bench noted that petitioners are not back door entrants to the service and, therefore, by no stretch of imagination can be treated unfairly by the respondents.
It underscored that petitioners have participated in the selection process and competed with all other eligible candidates and got selected on the basis of their merit by the duly constituted Selection Committee.
The court held that petitioners were appointed against the substantive posts and are eligible/qualified for regularization in the light of policy framed by the Corporation which was made applicable with respect to the similarly situated contractual employees.
