BASHIR AHMED MALIK Vs. STATE OF J&K
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Bashir Ahmed Malik
STATE OF JANDK
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE appellant submits that he having worked for more than three and a halt year with the State Administration was entitled to get his services
regularised in terms of Government Order No. GAD -1220 of 1989 dated 11th
Sept., 1989. This assertion of his did not find favour with a learned
Single Judge of this court. It was held that no direction can be issued
to regularise the services of the appellant. It is in these
circumstances, the appellant has filed this appeal under Clause 12 of the
(2.) THE appellant came to be appointed as a Junior Crafts Instructor on 17th Feb., 1989. This was for a period of three months or
till the formal selection of suitable candidates is made by the Service
Selection Board. Another order came to be issued on 5th Sept., 1989. This
was for the post of Junior Stenography Instructor. The tenure was
similar. About fifteen orders of similar tenure came to be issued in
about three years period. The appellant submits that as he had continued
in service for all these years, therefore, he is entitled to continue in
terms of Government order dated 11th Sept., 1989.
(3.) THE respondent -State filed objections. The break up of the service tenure has been indicated. From 7th Feb., 1989 to 11th June, 1991
eight orders giving adhoc tenure for various periods of 89 days or three
months were passed. There was a stipulation that the tenure would come to
an end on the expiry of the term or till regular appointments are made by
the Selection Board. Services of the appellant were terminated on 31st
July. 1991. The appellant was again appointed on 9th Sept., 1991.
Thereafter seven other orders came to be issued All these were adhoc in
nature with a clear stipulation that the services of the appellant would
be terminated either on the expiry of the term or in the event of regular
selectee came to be appointed. These facts and figures have been given in
para No. 1 of reply on merits.
Question of regularisation of an irregularly appointed candidates would arise if the concerned candidate is appointed in an
irregular manner or on adhoc basis against an available vacancy which
stands sanctioned. If the initial entry itself is unathorised and is not
against any sanctioned vacancy, question regularising incumbent on such a
non -existing vacancy would never survive for consideration even if order
of regularisation is made it would amount to decorating a still -born
baby. See Ashwani Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (1997) 2 SCC 1.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.