LPA No.167/2025 1 | P a g e IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Reserved on: 31.07.2025 Pronounced on:14.08.2025 CJ Court LPA No.167/2025 1. Mushtaq Ahmad Bhat S/o Ghulam Ahmad Bhat R/o Mohalla Jadeed Baramulla. 2. Saleema Bano D/o Mohammad Abdullah Khan R/o Khanpora Baramulla. ...APPELLANTS(S) Through: - Mr. Hamza Prince, Advocate. Vs. 1. Union Territory of J&K through Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Govt. Higher Education Department, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu. 2. Director, College, Higher Education Department, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu. 3. Government Women’s College, Baramulla, through its Principal. ...RESPONDENT(S) Through: - Mr. Ilyas Nazir Laway, GA. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE JUDGMENT OSWAL ‘J’ 1) The appellants were engaged as Instructors in Boutique Technology Centre of Government Women’s College, Baramulla, on 23.06.2015 and 01.11.2015 respectively. The appellants were initially paid wages of Rs.100/ per hour which were enhanced from time to time and the last wage paid to the appellants was Rs.225/ per day. The appellants LPA No.167/2025 2 | P a g e filed a writ petition for commanding the respondents to continue them as Instructors in Boutique Technology Centre of the College till the scheme continues and need of Instructors continues and further the respondents be directed to forthwith pay minimum wages to the appellants as per the rules applicable by treating them as skilled workers under the notifications issued by the Government under the Payment of Minimum Wages Act from time to time. 2) The respondents objected to the writ petition by submitting that the erstwhile Minister for Education issued direction for establishing a boutique centre outside college that was supposed to run on commercial lines without putting any burden on the college. The appellants were paid through the income generated out of the fee deposited by the beneficiaries i.e. students as well as female residents of the locality. The programme was not the approved course of the college for its students only and the role of the college was limited to the extent of managerial body only to facilitate the programme. The programme is conducted once or twice for a period of one month and maximum for three months only for imparting training to students and others also. The college, in order to safeguard the interests of the appellants’ paid the remuneration by debt to the NSS fund. In fact, whole motive was to promote the programme without any financial burden on the college. The extension of the engagement orders was LPA No.167/2025 3 | P a g e purely based on the goodwill gesture of the college. It was further stated that the college had raised a demand with the higher authorities for having a skilled course added in the curriculum of the college so that it can have better results in course management besides valid certifications for the trainees. In response to the demand so made, the Higher Education Department sanctioned the Boutique Technology/Fashion Designing as a skill course and introduced in the curriculum with credit weightage points with effect from 2021. Since the course has been included in the college curriculum, High Tech Machinery and instruments mostly computerized have been introduced for the first time and, accordingly, only a certified and skillful instructors and trainers can be engaged after following rules through advertisement and selection and the appellants, if eligible, can also apply and compete along with other aspirants. 3) The learned Writ Court vide its order dated 26.05.2025, allowed the writ petition in part by directing the respondents to release the legitimately earned wages of the appellants for the period they had worked with them in terms of their engagement orders. The prayer of the appellants for continuance of their engagement with the respondents was declined by the learned Writ Court. LPA No.167/2025 4 | P a g e 4) The appellants have come up with this intra-court appeal against the order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the learned Writ Court on the grounds, inter-alia, that the engagement under a scheme is coterminous with the scheme itself and, thus, the engagement has to continue till the scheme lasts but the learned Writ Court has not considered this aspect of the matter while passing the impugned order. It is also urged that discontinuation at this stage would be stigmatic and punitive in effect and the respondents are under a legal obligation to continue with the engagement of the appellants as they had been working as Instructors with the respondents for more than ten years. 5) Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the respondents are under an obligation to continue with the engagement of the appellants as after ten long years, the appellants cannot be thrown out. 6) Per contra, Mr. Ilyas Nazir Laway, learned GA, has argued that the appellants have no vested right to continue as Instructors because the role of the college was limited only to facilitate the functioning of the Boutique and to protect the interests of the appellants, they were being paid from NSS funds and after 2021, the course has been included in the college curriculum. 7) Heard and perused the record. LPA No.167/2025 5 | P a g e 8) This is evident from the record that the Boutique, being run by the respondents, was outside the purview of the normal functioning/activities of the college and the appellants were not on the rolls of the respondents. However, to protect the interests of the appellants, they were being paid from NSS fund. It is also the stand of the respondents that with effect from 2021, the course has been included in the college curriculum and further high tech machineries have been introduced which require skillful instructors and trainers to be selected through proper advertisement and the appellants, if eligible, can also apply. 9) In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the claim of the appellants in respect of their prayer to allow them to continue as Instructors with the respondents and learned Writ Court has determined the controversy at hand in its correct perspective. 10) Viewed thus, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed accordingly. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Srinagar 14.08.2025 “Bhat Altaf” Whether the Judgment is speaking: Yes Whether the judgment is reportable: No