Bilal Ahmad Mochi vs FINANCE DEPARTMENT on 31 December 2025

ORDER

(Oral)

Per Hon’ble Mr. M.S. Latif, Member (Judl.):- The applicants four

(04) in number have filed the instant O.A. Since, the cause of action and the reliefs claimed by all the applicants are identical, the M.A. for joint application under Rule 4(5)(a) of CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987, is allowed.

2. Through the medium of the instant O.A., the applicant has sought for the following reliefs:

a. Command and Direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court in judgments titled Jagoo vs Union of India reported in 2024 INC 1034, Shirpal & Anr vs Nigam Nagar, Ghaziabad reported in 2025 INC 2144 & Dharam Singh vs State of UР.

b. Command and direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants in terms of SRO-520 of 2017 dated 21.12.2017, from the date they have completed the requisite uninterrupted service, with all consequential benefits including seniority, pay-fixation and continuity in

Location:

ABHISHEK PUNIA

service;

c. Direct the respondents to extend the benefit of regularization from back date, strictly in accordance with law and in conformity with the directions issued in previously adjudicated cases by the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble Tribunal concerning similarly situated daily wagers/casual labourers;

d. Direct the respondents to place the applicants on regular rolls of the department from the date the applicants become eligible under the said SRO with attendant benefits.

3. As stated in the O.A. and submitted by learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. M. A. Wani, the applicants were engaged as Safai Walas in the respondent department between 2007 and 2014 and have been continuously discharging their duties for more than a decade. It is stated that the Government issued SRO 460 of 2017, by virtue of which the daily wages rates were enhanced. However, the said benefit was not accorded to the applicants, which compelled them to approach the Hon’ble High Court of J&K by way of WP(C) No. 393/2020. The Hon’ble High Court of J&K disposed of the Writ Petition in favour of the applicants, and

Location:

ABHISHEK PUNIA

respondents while complying with the directions enhanced the wages of the applicants w.e.f. 10.02.2021.

4. It is stated that the applicants were entitled to the benefit under SRO 460 of 2017 retrospectively w.e.f. 01.01.2018. However, the respondents accorded the benefit to the applicants only w.e.f. 10.02.2021. Being aggrieved, the applicants approached the Hon’ble High Court of J&K by way of WP(C) No. 1290/2021 and the Hon’ble High Court directed the respondents to grant the benefit w.e.f. 25.01.2018. Further, non-compliance necessitated the applicants to file CCP (S) No. 170/2023 before the Hon’ble High Court. The respondents, while complying with the judgment, granted the benefit to the applicants w.e.f. 01.01.2018 and the said order was kept subject to the outcome of the decision of the LPA pending before the Hon’ble High Court. The said LPA, as stated, has been dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court of J&K.

5. The applicants are aggrieved by the fact that despite being in service with the respondents for more than a decade, their services are not being regularized. It is stated that similarly situated employees’ services have been regularized by the respondents in terms of SRO 520 of 2017 dated 21.12.2017.

Location:

ABHISHEK PUNIA

However, the same benefit is not granted in favour of the applicants.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the judgments passed by Hon’ble Apex Court as well as High Court of J&K in the cases titled as Jagoo v. Union of India 2024 INC 1034, Shirpal & Anr. v. Nigam Nagar, Ghaziabad 2025 INC 2144 and Dharam Singh v. State of U.P. 2025 Live Law SC 2025 and relied upon the principle that the applicants are performing the same duties as performed by their counterparts, who are working on permanent basis, as such the applicants are also entitled to regularization in view of the above judgments.

7. Heard.

8. At the request of learned counsel for the applicants, the O.A. is taken up for its disposal.

9. The O.A. is disposed of by providing that the respondents shall treat this O.A. as representation and decide the case of the applicants in accordance with law, keeping in view their entitlements and merits of the case. The above exercise shall be done by passing a speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the

Location:

ABHISHEK PUNIA

respondents. It is made clear that the respondents while considering and disposing of the representation shall keep in view the law laid down hereinabove, if the applicants are similarly situated. Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits or otherwise of the case.

10. Accordingly, O.A./1493/2025 is disposed of along with all connected M.A.s, if any.

11. No order as to costs.

(M.S. Latif) Member (Judl.) Abhishek Punia Court Master 31.12.2025

Location:

ABHISHEK PUNIA