Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Poonam Rani vs The Ut Of J&K on 18 August, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
Serial No. 16
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 1923/2022
CM No. 5314/2022
Poonam Rani, age 46 years .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
D/o Bharat Bhushan
R/o 597-A, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu.
Through: Mr. Jasbir Singh Jasrotia, Advocate
vs
1. The UT of J&K, th. ..... Respondent(s)
Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. GAD,
Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu.
2. Principal Secretary to Govt., PDD, Civil
Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu.
3. Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission,
J&K and Ladakh, Panama Chowk, Jammu
th. its Secretary.
4. Chairman Joint Electricity Regulatory
Commission, Panama Chowk, Jammu.
5. Secretary, Joint Electricity Regulatory
Commission, J&K and Ladakh, Panama
Chowk, Jammu.
Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.
Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG.
Ms. Sagira Jaffar, assisting counsel to
Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
18.08.2025
Sanjeev Kumar 'J'
1. Impugned in this petition, filed by the petitioner-Poonam Rani under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is an order/judgment dated
21.01.2022 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu
["the Tribunal"] in OA No. 61/514/2021 titled Poonam Rani Vs. UT
of J&K and Ors. whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the OA of the
petitioner on the ground that the same is barred by limitation and also
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
that her employer i.e. Electricity Regulatory Commission stands
wound up.
2. Before we advert to the grounds of challenge urged by Mr. Jasbir
Singh Jasrotia, learned counsel for the petitioner, we deem it
appropriate to give brief resume of the factual antecedents leading to
the filing of this petition.
3. Vide Government Order No. 443-GAD of 2006 dated 10.04.2006,
the Government authorized the Chairman, J&K State Electricity
Regulatory Commission (SERC) to fill up three sanctioned posts,
including one post of Steno-cum-Computer Operator on contractual
basis for a period of one year from open market with a clear direction
that the post shall be immediately referred to the J&K Service
Selection Board for making the selection. It is not clear whether the
posts, including the post of Steno-cum-Computer Operator, were ever
referred to the Service Selection Board or not.
4. Be that as it may, pursuant to the authorization given by Government,
the SERC vide Order No. 39/J&KSERC/2006 dated 28.12.2006
engaged the services of the petitioner as Steno-cum-Computer
Operator for a period of three months and extendable for one year on
the basis of satisfactory performance. This contractual engagement of
the petitioner was extended from time to time, however, the last
extension in favour of the petitioner was made by SERC vide order
dated 31.03.2009 for a period of six months, which ended on
30.09.2009. The petitioner was even permitted to continue to serve
beyond that period by the SERC in terms of Government Order No.
1328-GAD of 2009 dated 24.09.2009. This is how the petitioner
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
continued to perform her duties as Steno-cum-Computer Operator on
contractual basis till the year 2019, when the SERC came to be
would up in terms of Government Order No. 1146-GAD of 2019
dated 23.10.2019.
5. It needs to be noticed that with a view to providing for regularization
of the employees appointed on ad hoc, contractual or consolidated
basis, the then State of J&K enacted the J&K Civil Services (Special
Provisions) Act, 2010, which, inter alia, provided for regularization
of services of ad hoc, contractual or consolidated employees having
completed seven years of continuous service on the appointed day i.e.
the date of commencement of Act of 2010 (for short, the Act of
2010). Proviso second of Section 5 further provided that any ad hoc,
contractual or consolidated appointee, who had not completed seven
years of service on the appointed day, would continue as such, till
completion of seven years and would be entitled to regularization
under the Act thereafter.
6. The petitioner, who was continuing in the contractual appointment,
completed seven years of continuous service as such on 03.01.2014.
With a view to conferring the benefit of regularization under the Act
of 2010, the case of the petitioner was processed by SERC and sent
to the Member Secretary, Empowered Committee under the
communication of the Secretary, SERC bearing No. JKSERC/42-
C/1240-43 dated 06.01.2014. The copy of the case was also sent to
the administrative department i.e. the Power Development
Department for necessary action.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
7. It seems that the administrative department of PDD referred the
matter of regularization of the petitioner to the General
Administration Department, but the same was turned down on the
ground that in view of provisions of Section 3(c) of the Act of 2010,
the case of the petitioner did not fall within the purview of the Act of
2010 providing for regularization of services of ad hoc, consolidated
or contractual employees.
8. Ordinarily, at this stage, the petitioner ought to have agitated the
matter in the competent Court of law. However, she was seemingly
persuaded not to do so as the SERC once again took up the matter
with the administrative department for reconsideration of the case of
the petitioner for regularization on the ground that SERC did not fall
outside the purview of the applicability of the Act of 2010 for the
reason that it had not framed any rules and regulations governing its
functioning.
9. The matter ought to have been reconsidered by the Government in
light of the communication of SERC bearing No. JKSERC/42-C/290
dated 29.06.2015. It seems that the case of the petitioner along with
others was placed before the Empowered Committee for taking
appropriate decision with regard to her regularization, but the same
was once again turned down by the Empowered Committee on the
same ground that the Act was not applicable to SERC. This is evident
from the decision of the Empowered Committee taken in its 44th
meeting held on 31.12.2014.
10. It is thus evident that the matter was never placed before the
Empowered Committee again, particularly in the light of the
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
clarification given by SERC by re-submitting the case of the
petitioner for regularization. The SERC, to whom the petitioner had
rendered her services, did not relent and continued to make
recommendations to the Government for her regularization under the
Act of 2010.
11. While the petitioner was waiting for favourable outcome from the
Government, particularly in the light of strong recommendation made
by the SERC in her favour, the SERC came to be wound up vide
Government Order No. 1146-GAD of 2019 dated 23.10.2019. As a
result of winding up of the SERC, all the staff posted there and drawn
from various departments was sent back to their respective
departments. The petitioner, who was yet to be regularized and who
was yet to become a member of Government service was left high
and dry.
12. It is at this stage, when the petitioner thought of knocking the doors
of justice. She approached the Tribunal by way of OA No. 514 of
2021, which has been dismissed by the Tribunal in terms of
judgment/order impugned in this petition on the grounds which we
have already indicated hereinabove.
13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties` and perused material on
record, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment impugned
passed by the Tribunal is totally flawed, and therefore, cannot be
sustained.
14. Indisputably, the petitioner came to be engaged as Steno-cum-
Computer Operator on contractual basis by the SERC on the
authorisation given by the General Administration Department of the
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
Government of Jammu and Kashmir. The engagement of the
petitioner was against a sanctioned post. She was allowed to continue
in the contractual engagement by the Commission by giving her
extensions from time to time. In the year 2014, she completed seven
years of continuous service and became entitled to regularization
under the Act of 2010. The SERC, having found the petitioner
eligible to the benefit of regularization under the Act of 2010,
submitted the complete case to the Government for passing of
appropriate orders. The case was turned down by the Government
only on the ground that in terms of Sub-Section (c) of Section 3, the
Act of 2010 was not applicable to the autonomous bodies like SERC.
15. With a view to find out justification in the stand of the Government
in denying the benefit of regularization to the petitioner, we have
carefully gone through the provisions of Section 3 of the Act of 2010
in its entirety.
16. Section 3, for facility of reference is reproduced hereunder:-
3. Application of the Act.- The provisions of this Act shall apply
to such posts under the Government as are held by any person
having been appointed on ad hoc or contractual basis including
those appointed on consolidated pay provided that such
appointments have been made against the clear vacancies, but
shall not apply to:-
a) Persons appointed in terms of Government Order No.
125-GAD of 2001, dated 01.02.2001, on contract basis in
the personal sections of Ministers or other authorities
enjoying the status of a Minister;
b) Persons appointed on tenure posts co-terminus with the
life of the project or Scheme of the State or Central
Government, as the case may be, and those appointed on
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
academic arrangement for a fixed term in any
Government Department;
c) Non-governmental agencies or autonomous bodies or
public sector undertakings or corporations or
government companies or societies or other local
authorities which have their own rules and regulations
governing their functioning; and
d) Part-time or seasonal employees including those whose
wages are paid from out of the local funds or contingent
grants.
17. From perusal of Section 3(c), it is abundantly clear that only such
non-Government agencies/autonomous bodies and public sector
undertakings/corporations etc. are kept out of the purview of the Act
of 2010, that may have their own rules and regulations governing
their functioning.
18. Admittedly, the SERC, from its constitution till it was wound up, has
failed to frame any rules and regulations of its own governing its
functioning. The entire regular staff, which was posted in the SERC
was drawn from different departments. The three sanctioned posts,
including the one occupied by the petitioner was, however,
authorized to be filled up by way of contractual arrangement by none
other than the Department of General Administration. The
authorization from the GAD was required only for the reason that
SERC did not have its own rules and regulations governing its
functioning including the appointment of any staff to run its affairs.
19. The communication of SERC bearing No. JKSERC/42-C/290 dated
29.06.2015 addressed to the Principal Secretary to Government,
Power Development Department, Government of Jammu and
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
Kashmir, is self-speaking and clears the doubts, if any with regard to
the status of rules and regulations of the Commission.
20. Had the matter been placed before the Empowered Committee in the
light of the communication of SERC dated 29.06.2015, perhaps the
result would have been different.
21. Be that as it may, the Governemnt having rejected the case once was
reluctant to reopen it despite strong persuasion made by SERC from
time to time through its recommendations.
22. As is evident, Section 3(c) was no impediment in the way of
respondents to order regularization of the petitioner giving her the
benefit of Act of 2010. The SERC, for the reasons given above, was
not an autonomous body/statutory corporation as envisaged under
Section 3(c) to which the provisions of the Act of 2010 were not
applicable.
23. Viewed thus, the right to regularization under the Act of 2010, which
accrued to the petitioner in the year 2014, upon completion of seven
years of continuous service, as contractual appointee, cannot be said
to have been taken away by the winding up of SERC, upon coming
into operation of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019 and the repeal of
J&K State Electricity Act, 2010.
24. Had the petitioner been regularized in time, she, too, could have been
taken back by the GAD and adjusted in some Government
department. We are also not convinced by the observation of the
Tribunal that there was inordinate delay by the petitioner in
approaching the Tribunal for redressal of her grievance.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
25. It is true that the case of the petitioner stood rejected by the
respondents for regularization, though on a wrong premise, in the
year 2014, yet the matter was again processed by SERC and taken up
with the Government giving legitimate hope to the petitioner that her
grievance would be redressed and addressed by the competent
authority in the light of the material provided by the SERC.
26. It, however, did not happen for couple of years and in the meanwhile,
with the coming into force of J&K Reorganization Act, 2019 and the
repeal of J&K State Electricity Act, 2010, the SERC was wound up
leaving the petitioner high and dry.
27. For the foregoing reasons, we find merit in this petition and the same
is, accordingly, allowed. The judgment impugned passed by the
Tribunal is set aside and the OA is disposed of with following
directions:
(i) That the petitioner, having worked as Steno-cum-Computer
Operator against a clear vacancy continuously for a period of
seven years as contractual appointee, is entitled to the benefit
of regularization under the Act of 2010 and that the SERC
does not fall within the ambit of Section 3(c) of the Act of
2010.
(ii) The case of the petitioner shall be reconsidered by the
Empowered Committee in the light of the communication of
SERC dated 19.06.2017 (supra) as also the observations,
which we have made hereinabove within a period of four
weeks from the date a copy of this judgment is served upon the
respondents.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2360-DB
(iii) The petitioner, subject to fulfilling of other eligibility
conditions provided under the Act of 2010, shall be regularized
prospectively from the date of issuance of formal order of
regularization and she shall be posted in any of the
Government departments or in the Joint Electricity Regulatory
Commission, J&K, provided such post is available in the new
Commission.
(Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar)
Judge Judge
Jammu
18.08.2025
Vishal Sharma
Whether this judgment is reportable: Yes.
