WP(C) No.362/2022 Page 1 of 4 S. No.28 Regular List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) No.362/2022 CM No.922/2022 Firdous Ahmad and Ors ... Petitioner(s) Through: -Mr. Mufti Mehraj-ud-din, Advocate. Vs. UT of J&K and Ors …Respondent(s) Through: -Mr.Syed Musaib, Dy.AG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 21.02.2025 1) The petitioners through the medium of present petition have sought a direction upon the respondents to allow them to continue on their positions without any break/impediment. Further direction has been sought upon the respondents to disburse unpaid salary to the petitioners. 2) Heard and Considered. 3) According to the petitioners, petitioner No.1 was engaged as an Attendant in the office of respondent No.4 vide order dated 14.12.2013, petitioner No.2 was engaged as Night Chowkidar cum Sweeper vide order dated 16.01.2018 and petitioner No.3 was engaged as Gardner w.e.f 01.05.2018. It has been submitted that after WP(C) No.362/2022 Page 2 of 4 discharging their duties to the entire satisfaction of the superiors, the wages of the petitioners were enhanced from Rs.4500/- per month to Rs.6750/- per month. It has been submitted that the petitioners are regularly and uninterruptedly discharging their duties to the entire satisfaction of their superiors, however, their wages are not being paid regularly by the respondents. 4) It has also been submitted that the petitioners had filed the petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal Srinagar, seeking their regularization which has been disposed of by the Tribunal on 07.10.2021 by directing the respondents to treat their petition as representation and to pay their unpaid arrears of salary. According to the petitioners despite service of aforesaid order upon the respondents their wages are not being regularly released in their favour. It has been submitted that similarly situated persons have filed writ petition bearing WP(C) No.88/2022 which is pending before this Court, as such the petitioners have also invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 5) Respondents in their objections have admitted the engagement of the petitioners but they have submitted that petitioner No.1 has worked continuously till 29th September, 2015 from the date of joining and thereafter he was re-engaged by the Director Technical Education vide order dated 06.04.2018 by debit of IDF Central Pool Fund. It has been submitted that the said petitioner has been continued and has been paid honorarium till April 2019. It has also WP(C) No.362/2022 Page 3 of 4 been submitted that the said petitioner was asked not to attend the office in terms of guidelines dated 24.05.2019 but in view of the directions passed by this Court he is presently attending the duties. Regarding petitioner No.2 it has been submitted that he was engaged vide order dated 16.01.2018 issued by Superintendent ITI and he was being paid regularly by debit to IDF. The said petitioner was also directed not to attend the office in terms of guidelines dated 24.05.2019, but he is presently attending his duties pursuant to the Court directions. Regarding petitioner No.3 it has been submitted that he was engaged in terms of letter dated 18.11.2018 and he was directed not to attend the duties in terms of Circular dated 24.05.2019 and that he is presently attending his duties in terms of court order. It has been further submitted that the petitioners have no right to continue with the respondents and that respondent No.4 has requested the Director Skill Development Department for release of pending wages vide letter dated 29.07.2021. 6) From the pleadings of the parties it is clear that the petitioners were engaged as need based employees and they were to be paid wages out of Institutional Development Fund (IDF) subject to the allotment of funds from the Directorate of Technical Education. Their engagement was not of permanent nature. The respondents have taken a stand that in terms of Circular dated 24.05.2019 the petitioners were directed not to attend their duties but due to interim order passed by this Court they were allowed to continue, meaning thereby that the WP(C) No.362/2022 Page 4 of 4 petitioners have been discharging their duties with the respondents till date. 7) In the connected petition titled Sajad Ahmad Dar vs Union Territory of J&K and Ors bearing WP(C) No.88/2022 a direction has been issued to the respondents to release the pending and future wages of the petitioner therein so long as he works with the respondents. The petitioners herein claim parity with petitioner Sajad Ahmad Dar. Therefore, this petition is required to be disposed of in the same terms. 8) Accordingly the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the pending and future wages of the petitioners so long as they continue to discharge their duties with the respondents. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR 21.02.2025 Sarveeda Nissar Sarveeda Nissar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document every page at bottom left side 27.02.2025 17:14