ABDUL QAYOOM BANDAY Vs. STATE OF J AND K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners seek issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners against the post of Sr. Lectures, DIET (HOD) w.e.f. 04-10-94 and 30-03-95 respectively, the date when the Petitioners were directed to work against the posts.

(2.) The Petitioners while working as Sr. Lecturers in the Department of Education, petitioner No.1 vide Govt. order No. 430-Edu of 1994 dated 4.10.1994 and Petitioner No. 2 vide Govt. order No. 638-Edu of 95 dated 30.03.95, were adjusted as Senior Lecturers DIET, on the terms and conditions stipulated in the order extracted portion whereof reads as under : Sanction is accorded to the adjustment of following Lecturers / Sr. Lecturer DIET in the various District Institutes of Education and Trainings for a period of six months or till the posts are filled up by the DPC /PSC whichever is earlier. The adjustment of these Sr. Lecturers shall be purely on stop gap arrangement and it shall not confer any preferential claim or right to the incumbent at the time of selection by the DPC / PSC. They will be entitled to the charge allowance as admissible under rules.

(3.) The Petitioners seek regularisation on the ground that they have been continuing against the posts of Sr. Lecturers DIET since their adjustment in the year 1994 and 1995 respectively, and not for the reason that they being the senior most Lecturers are required to be considered for promotion against the higher post of Senior Lecturers DIET. It has been admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the post of Senior Lecturer in Adult Education Wing and the School Education Wing form the same cadre. The petitioners seek their regularisation against the posts only on the ground that they have been working against the posts since 1994 and 1995, relying upon the judgement delivered in case Vijay Kumar v. State and Others, SLJ 1994, 165. Perusal of the Judgement reveals that the posts of Research Officers in the Department of Education were created and the said petitioners being already in Government Education Gazetted services, were directed to hold the posts of the higher pay scale in their own pay and grade. They continued for more than ten years, but were not considered to hold the posts substantively. No senior to those petitioners was to be effected and admittedly, those petitioners were promoted in their own pay and grade, in accordance with rules. The respondents objection to the appointment of those petitioners to the post of Research Officers in the higher pay scale, was that the posts have never been referred to the Public Service Commission or Departmental promotion Committee for selection of the petitioners. Under such circumstances, the court granted the relief to those petitioners observing that the formality of seeking approval of Public Service Commission / Departmental Promotion committee can be dispensed especially when the petitioners are working as Research Officers for a period over ten years.