Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3559 (JK)

DANIEL AND OTHERS v. UT OF J AND K TH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JAMMU AND OTHERS

WP(C)/1486/2025 · 2025-06-04

Moksha Khajuria Kazmi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C ) No. 1486/2025 Daniel and others ….applicant Through :- Mr. Gagan Basotra Sr. AAG with Ms Navdeep Kour Advocate. V/s UT of Jammu and Kashmir and ors Through :- Mr. Rajnish Raina Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER(ORAL) 05.06.2025 1 The petitioners, engaged as Safai Karamcharis (sanitation workers) with the Jammu Municipal Corporation (JMC) since 2014 on a casual basis, have approached this Court through the medium of instant petition seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus. The prayer is twofold: (i) to command respondent No.3 to communicate with respondent No.5 for constituting a Medical Board to determine the age/date of birth of the petitioners, and (ii) to direct the official respondents to regularize their services in terms of JMC Order No. 54 of 2023 dated 17.01.2023 and order dated 11.02.2023, upon determination of their date of birth and verification of other requisite documents. 2 The grievance of the petitioners is that although similarly situated workers among the 585 sanitation workers were regularized, the petitioners’ services were withheld on the sole ground that no official record 2 of their date of birth exists. The petitioners submit that in the past, in terms of JMC Order No. 164 of 2010 dated 05.06.2010, similar cases were dealt with by directing respondent No.5 to constitute a Medical Board for determination of age, particularly in cases of illiterate employees who lacked educational or documentary proof of their date of birth. In the instant case, the petitioners have already made representation to respondent No.3, who in turn has forwarded the matter to respondent No.5, but as of date, no Medical Board has been constituted, leading to inaction and continued denial of regularization benefits to the petitioners. 3 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record. 4 Regulation 35-AA(a)(iv) of the Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service Regulations clearly stipulates that for illiterate employees without valid proof of age, a Medical Board comprising the Chief Medical Officer, Radiologist, and Dental Surgeon of the concerned District shall ascertain the age. This regulation applies squarely to the case of the petitioners. The prayer made by the petitioners is limited and reasonable, as it only seeks the implementation of an existing administrative process. Denying this request would result in unfair discrimination, especially when other similarly placed employees have already been given the benefit of regularization. Such denial violates the right to equality and non-discrimination guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 5 The Supreme Court in Randhir Singh v. Union of India & Ors. (1982) 1 SCC 618 has held that equal pay for equal work and equal treatment 3 among similarly situated employees is a fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution. 6 In view of the above, the petition is disposed of at the threshold without issuing notice to the respondents, keeping in view the innocuous nature of the relief sought, with the following directions: 1. Respondent No.5 is directed to constitute a Medical Board within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, in terms of Regulation 35-AA(a)(iv) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations, for the purpose of determining the age of the petitioners. 2. Respondent No.3 shall ensure that all necessary formalities are completed within one week to enable respondent No.5 to act accordingly. 3. Upon receipt of the Medical Board’s report, the respondent No.3 shall take appropriate steps for the regularization of the services of the petitioners, in accordance with JMC Order No. 54 of 2023 dated 17.01.2023 and other applicable orders, within a further period of four weeks. 4. It is, however, made clear that nothing in this order shall preclude the respondent No.3 from carrying out verification of the petitioners' documents and antecedents, in accordance with law. (MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE Jammu 04.06.2025 Sanjeev Whether approved for judgment: Yes/No