HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU SWP No. 766/2009 Bharat Bhushan and others …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. C. M. Koul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A. R. Bhat, Advocate vs State of J&K and others .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 02.05.2025 1. Aggrieved of the order bearing No. SPO/Dis/09/11199-214 dated 23.03.2009 (For short ‘the impugned order’), the petitioners have approached this Court for quashing the same on the grounds inter alia that the order impugned, whereby, the petitioners were disengaged from the roll of SPOs, is stigmatic in nature and as such, notwithstanding the fact that their engagement was contractual in nature, they were required to be afforded due opportunity of hearing even before disengaging them, particularly when the respondents had imputed negligence on the part of the petitioners in performance of their duties, while disengaging the petitioners. 2. Response stands filed by the respondents, stating therein that the contractual/temporary services of the petitioners were no longer required by the Department as they failed to perform their duties with dedication and satisfaction and on account of being habitual of Serial No. 10 2 SWP No. 766/2009 remaining absent without any authorization, they were disengaged in terms of order dated 23.03.2009. 3. Mr. C. M. Koul, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the order is stigmatic in nature and the respondents could not have disengage the petitioners without affording due opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, Mrs. Monika Kohli, learned Senior AAG has vehemently opposed the claim of the petitioners by submitting that the engagement of the petitioners was contractual in nature and no opportunity of hearing was required to be afforded to them before dispensing with their services particularly when they were negligent in performing their duties. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Before this Court proceeds further, it is apt to observe that this petition has been pending before this Court for 16 years and neither the petitioners nor the respondents have placed on record the engagement order of the petitioners, as such, this Court shall determine the controversy with a premise that the petitioners were engaged on contractual basis. There is no dispute with regard to settled proposition of law that even if engagement/appointment is contractual in nature, the contract/engagement of an employee cannot be terminated without conducting any enquiry or in other words, without affording due opportunity of hearing to such employee. (See V.P. Ahuja v. State of Punjab and others reported in AIR 2000 SC 1080). 7. In the order impugned, it has been mentioned by the respondents that the services of the petitioners are no longer required as they have 3 SWP No. 766/2009 failed to perform their duties with satisfaction and dedication and further, they are habitual of remaining absent from their duties. The respondents have nowhere stated in respect of period of engagement of the petitioners, though it is stated that contractual/temporary services of the petitioners were no longer required by the respondents. 8. This Court has not even an iota of doubt in its mind that the order impugned is stigmatic in nature and if the respondents were to disengage the petitioners on such allegations, they ought to have conducted an enquiry or afforded due opportunity of hearing to them in accordance with law but having not done so, the order impugned is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 9. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 23.03.2009 is quashed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioners to work as SPOs, however the respondents are left free to hold an enquiry afresh in accordance with law, if they intend to do so. 10. Disposed of. (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 02.05.2025 Neha-II Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No NEHA KUMARI 2025.05.02 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document