Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Oct 12: The High Court today set aside the writ court judgment directing the Kashmir University (KU) to regularize the services of its casual and contractual appointees and said the matter be referred to the Chancellor to endorse fresh decision for regularization of these employees.
Challenge was thrown to the judgment of writ court with the direction to the KU authorities to proceed with the process of regularization of 84 causal, contractual and consolidated employees of the varsity on the ground that such a direction cannot be carried out without the approval of the Administration, it being the ultimate custodian of the finance of the Union Territory because of which the matter was proposed to be referred again to the Chancellor, who is none other than the Lt. Governor of the UT of Jammu and Kashmir.
Advocate General appearing for Varsity submitted that the University is dependent for financial support of the UT and hence, unless the University has the approval of the Administration, the proposed regularization of the casual/contract/consolidated pay employees cannot be implemented.
“Accordingly, for the reasons discussed above, we were not able to agree with the impugned judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed by the Single Judge and the same is set aside”, Division Bench of Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Kazmir directed.
The DB, however, made it clear that in the event, the Chancellor or the Administration take any view not favourable to these employees for regularization, the same may be notified to the employees by a reasoned order and such an act and decision will be subject to judicial review, and the writ petitioners would be at liberty to approach this Court again for redressal of their grievances.
Court added that the earlier decision in one of the case is not applicable to the instant case as if the posts are sanctioned and borne on the cadre, it would ipso facto mean that there would be budgetary provisions already made to meet the expenses by way of salary and other entitlements which will arise out of filling up the posts.
“But in the present case, this is not the situation. The present case deals with a proposal for regularizing services of contractual appointees by creating supernumerary posts which would entail additional expenses and these supernumerary posts are not yet borne on the cadre, and as such, we are of the view that the said decision will not be applicable in the present case, though we are also in agreement with the principle laid down that if the posts are already sanctioned posts and borne on the cadre, no financial concurrence is required from the State authorities”, the DB said.
The DB viewed that there is no illegality in referring the matter again to the Chancellor for his consideration as sought to be done by the University authorities with the hope and trust that in view of the earlier exercises undertaken as many as three times for regularization, the Chancellor would endorse the decision of the University for regularization of the 84 casual, contract and consolidated pay employees and the Administration would render financial assistance for the same.
“If the Chancellor endorses the decision of the University, the aggrieved employees would be entitled to be regularized as directed by the Single Judge in the impugned order”, read the judgment.
The DB judgment further clarified that the Administration also cannot outrightly reject any request from the University for financial assistance for regularization of its employees inasmuch as on earlier three occasions, the State/UT Administration had extended financial assistance for regularization of casual/contractual employees.
Court accordingly recorded that under normal circumstances, the Administration would be expected to render financial assistance to the University this time also, as otherwise, it may breach the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, as the Administration cannot act arbitrarily and in a discriminatory manner.
“Having said that, it cannot be also held that the Administration would have no option, but to provide financial assistance to the University and the Administration can withhold financial assistance for germane and sufficient reasons. But such a decision of the Administration, if denied financial assistance will be subject to judicial review”, the DB said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
