ROMESH KUMAR ZUTSHI Vs. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition represents petitioners long drawn battle and a last ditch effort to stay in service. He was initially engaged as casual labourer on 4. 6. 1988 in the J&K State Forest Corporation and was later "temporarily appointed as a substitute field assistant against the suspension vacancy of one Abdul Rehman working in the Rajouri Forest Division and was posted to Mahan division" by Corporations order No. 24 of 1990 dated 11.1.1990. This order specifically provided that his appointment would be for six months in the first instances or till the suspendes was reinstated which he was on 13. 11. 1990. It appears that the aforesaid order of appointment was cancelled and subsequent order dated 1.2.1990 passed by the Managing Director Petitioner challenged this in the court of Sub Judge (CJM), Jammu and obtained a stay order on 12. 2. 1990 and continued in service on its strength. The stay order was, however vacated on contest: by order dated 18.2.1991. The petitioner took an appeal against this order and again obtained a stay order. His appeal was eventually dismissed on 28.1.1993 and his services were , thereafter terminated by order dated 28. 3. 1994 which is under .challenge in this petition.

(2.) DURING this period, petitioner was suspended by order dated 13. 2. 1992 and was paid subsistence .allowance under Article 108 -A of the J&K Civil. Services; Regulations vide order dated 15.5.1992. He was reinstated on 14.12.1992 and his period of suspension was treated as on duty. He is also said to have contributed to C. P. Fund meanwhile.

(3.) PETITIONERS case in nutshell is that since he was allowed to continue in service after 13. 11 1990 when Abdul Rashid, Field Asstt. was reinstated in service and as his appointment was temporary, he should be deemed to have assumed quasi permanent status under rule 3 of the J&K. Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1961 and could have been sent out of service only on meeting the requirement of Rule 6 of these Rules. This is sought to be buttressed by the submission that the corporation management had all along treated him as a permanent employee which was evident from the way he was dealt with all along till, the impugned order was passed. The very fact that he was suspended and paid a subsistence allowance under the J&K Civil Service. Regulations (CSR) and reinstated, goes to show that the management was conscious of his status as a temporary employee and as he had been allowed to complete more than three years on the post, he acquired the quasi -permanent status and consequently could not be ousted without recourse to the requirements of Article 311 of the Constitution. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Goja, has relied upon AIR 1987 S. C. 110 and AIR 1985 S. C. 941, in support.