HC grants all benefits, expresses concern over respondents’ attitude

Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Oct 2: State High Court came to the rescue of an employee, who was appointed as Adhoc Junior Assistant in Education Department in 1986, and granted her all benefits.
While allowing the petition, Justice Tashi Rabstan directed the respondents to treat the petitioner Kusum Balato as in continuous service in terms of judgment/order dated 25.04.1989. Consequently, the petitioner would be treated to have been appointed on regular basis with effect from the date Government Order No.1220-GAD of 1989 dated 11.09.1989 came to be issued along with all consequential benefits on notional basis.
“In case there is no post of Junior Assistant vacant as on date, the respondents are directed to create a supernumerary post for the petitioner. Let relevant order(s) in this regard be issued within a period of two months”, High Court said.
Before parting with the judgment, High Court observed, “the petitioner has been hankering for justice for the last about 30 years, but the respondents despite clear-cut directions from the court in previous writ petitions did not appoint the petitioner on regular basis in terms of Government order dated 11.09.1989. Rather they rejected her claim on one or the other pretext, least bothering about the fact that this is the fourth round of litigation and in the melee about three decades have passed”.
“In the given circumstances, court really do not appreciate the manner in which the official respondents took the judicial process for a ride and rejected the case of petitioner on flimsy grounds”, Justice Rabstan said, adding “in the peculiar facts and circumstance of this case, the State is directed to bear and pay the costs to petitioner within a period of two months from today after proper verification and identification, which is quantified at Rs 50,000. It is made clear that in case the official respondents fail to deposit the costs in the Registry, Registrar (Judicial) shall frame a separate Robkar against them, and after issuing notice to them, list the same before the court”.