Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Feb 4: The Supreme Court has sought information from the Government of Jammu and Kashmir with regard to the casual, seasonal and need based workers regularized under SRO-520 of 2017.
The information in the shape of an affidavit has been sought by the Division Bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar in a Special Leave Petition challenging therein the judgment of Division Bench of J&K High Court passed in the year 2020.
The bench directed that the affidavit by the Government of J&K shall disclose the particulars of each individual regularized in terms of SRO-520 of 2017 and the same be filed within four weeks.
The judgment under challenge passed by the Division Bench of J&K High Court had partly allowed the erstwhile Government’s appeal in which the State had said that someone engaged as a casual labourer against a “non-substantive post” had absolutely no claim, in law, to seek regularization.
The petitioner-casual had approached the court for regularization of his services after having been engaged as a casual labourer in the year 1997. The High Court while disposing of the same in June 2008, by providing that the authorities would consider the petitioner, who is continuing in service, for regularization under law, if he is similarly situated with them in all respects.
The bench of the HC had observed that the casual labourer cannot seek regularization as no vested right accrues in his favour for such claim but if the employer comes up with any scheme for the benefit of such employees governing their engagement, the service of the casual labourers have to be, in such eventuality, dealt with under the provisions of such scheme and the benefit.
It is mentioned here that the Government of J&K for the regularization of casual labourers and daily rated workers issued two SROs one is SRO 64 of 1994 pertaining to the regularization of daily rated workers and SRO 520 of 2017 for the regularization/ absorption of casual labourers.
The SRO 520 provides that it will apply to all those CSLWs who are engaged upto 17.03.2015 and the bench of High Court said therefore, the rigor of retrospective application of the SRO was also not coming in the way as the petitioner-casual is admittedly engaged as casual labourer in the year 1997, therefore, he would fall in the category of employees engaged upto 17th March, 2015.
Court had viewed that the writ court has based its conclusion on a wrong premise and the same being not in accordance with the rules or the law on the subject needs to be interfered with and allowed the appeal and set-aside the impugned judgment & order with a direction to the respondents (authorities) to consider the case of the petitioner for his regularization on the touchstone of the provisions of SRO 520 of 2017.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
