Recently, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh declined to interfere with an order directing the regularisation of a daily-rated worker who had served the Irrigation Department continuously for over three decades, holding that the Union Territory could not deny statutory benefits after extracting work for such a prolonged period.
The case arose from a challenge filed by the Union Territory of J&K against a judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu, which had directed regularisation of the services of a daily wager under SRO 64 of 1994 along with release of unpaid wages. The worker had initially approached the Court in 2002 seeking regularisation, following which the authorities were directed to examine his case. However, despite repeated representations and internal communications acknowledging his continuous engagement, no concrete action was taken, and his wages were even stopped from May 2018.
Before the High Court, the Union Territory contended that the worker was engaged as a daily wager without any formal selection process or appointment against a sanctioned post and, therefore, had no vested right to regularisation. It was also argued that retrospective regularisation after nearly three decades would impose a heavy financial burden on the public exchequer and could open floodgates for similar claims.
Rejecting these submissions, the Division Bench observed that the record clearly established continuous engagement of the worker since the early 1990s and that the authorities themselves had repeatedly processed his case internally. The Court expressed astonishment at the State’s stand, noting that under SRO 64 of 1994, a daily wager becomes eligible for regularisation upon completion of seven years of continuous service, a condition which stood fulfilled long ago. The Bench emphasised that absence of sanctioned posts could not be used as a shield, especially when the statutory framework itself permits creation of posts for regularisation purposes.
The Court also relied on recent Supreme Court decisions cautioning against the misuse of temporary and daily-wage engagements for perennial work, observing that such practices undermine labour standards and principles of fairness. Holding that denial of regularisation after extracting work for over 34 years would be grossly inequitable, the Bench upheld the Tribunal’s directions for regularisation with consequential benefits and release of pending wages.
Finding no illegality in the Tribunal’s order, the High Court dismissed the petition filed by the Union Territory, reiterating that a welfare State cannot evade its statutory obligations by raising technical objections after decades of continuous service
Case Title: UT of J&K and others V. Som Raj
Case No.: WP(C) No. 3402/2025
Coram: Hon’ble Mr Chief Justice Arun Palli and Hon’ble Mr Justice Rajnesh Oswal
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr. AAG Monika Kohli
Counsel for the Respondent: Adv. Abirash Sharma,
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
