Jammu and Kashmir High Court
SWP/1240/2016 of RAHUL BADYAL AND ORS. Vs STATE TH.TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND ORS. on 19 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU (Through Virtual Mode) SWP 1240/2016 IA(1/2016) RAHUL BADYAL AND ORS ….. Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Rahil Raja, Adv. STATE TH.TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND ORS .. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Anishwar Chatterji Koul, GA Coram:
20
Regular
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
(Through Virtual Mode)
SWP 1240/2016 IA(1/2016)
RAHUL BADYAL AND ORS
….. Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Rahil Raja, Adv.
STATE TH.TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND ORS
.. Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. Anishwar Chatterji Koul, GA
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajnesh Oswal, Judge
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
19.09.2026
1. The petitioners have filed this petition for commanding the respondents not to replace them with similar arrangement and further commanding them to continue the petitioners on the posts for which they were engaged pursuant to Advertisement Notice dated 24th July 2015 till regular selection against the said post is made by the J&K Service Selection Board.
2. The respondents have filed response stating therein that the petitioners were engaged in the year 2015 under Academic Arrangement Basis for the years 2015-2016 and it is admitted by the respondents that no fresh advertisement has been issued for engaging new people and the writ petition has been filed only on the apprehension that their engagement will be terminated by the P a g e | 2 SWP 1240/2016 IA(1/2016)
respondents. Simultaneously, it is also stated that the petitioners have no right to continue.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. Admittedly the petitioners have been working since 2015-2016 till date and it is admitted by the respondents that the writ petition has been filed only on the apprehension that their engagement will be terminated by the respondents. There is further admission on the part of the respondents that no fresh advertisement has been issued for making new engagements.
5. In view of the above, once it is admitted by the respondents that the petitioners are continuing with their engagement made in the year 2015-2016 and their services have not been terminated, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to replace the petitioners with similar arrangement till regular selection against the said post is made by the J&K Service Selection Board.
6. Disposed of as above.
(Rajnesh Oswal)
Judge
SRINAGAR 19.09.2026 Aasif