The Jammu & Kashmir High Court set aside a Central Administrative Tribunal order that had regularised a long-serving casual driver as a driver in a higher pay band, and directed that he be regularised only as an orderly in the lowest entry grade, underscoring the statutory limits on regularising casual staff.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The respondent, Aftar Hussain, was appointed as a casual hand driver on 20.08.1998 by the Additional Director, Sericulture Development Department, Jammu. He received a consolidated salary of Rs. 3,600 per month and his engagement was repeatedly extended on a need-basis. He sought regularisation as a permanent driver, claiming entitlement under Section 5 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010.
Key Facts
20.08.1998: Order appointing respondent as casual hand driver.
14.05.2010: Development Officer’s letter noting respondent working as driver against a vacant post.
17.03.2015: Circular from the Principal Secretary, Finance Department banning engagement of casual/seasonal/need-based workers without Chief Secretary’s prior approval.
07.05.2015: Director, Sericulture Department’s letter directing implementation of the 17.03.2015 circular.
01.06.2015: Additional Director’s letter to Project Officer and Deputy Directors, with endorsement dated 10.06.2015, ordering disengagement of casual workers in Mulberry circles.
2011: Writ petition SWP No. 1351/2011 filed seeking regularisation as driver.
2015: Writ petition SWP No. 1923/2015 filed challenging the 2015 circular and seeking quash of its disengagement order.
2019: After the J&K Reorganisation Act, both writ petitions were transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and renumbered TA No. 230/2024 and TA No. 196/2024 respectively.
22.09.2025: CAT issued orders regularising the respondent as driver in pay band 475-850 and directing payment of arrears.
27.07.2026: The High Court delivered the present judgment.
Procedural History
20.08.1998: Appointment as casual driver.
14.05.2010: Departmental acknowledgment of his role.
17.03.2015: Government circular prohibiting casual engagements.
07.05.2015 & 01.06.2015: Implementation letters.
2011: First writ petition (SWP No. 1351/2011).
2015: Second writ petition (SWP No. 1923/2015).
2019: Transfer to CAT after J&K Reorganisation Act.
22.09.2025: CAT orders regularising respondent as driver (pay band 475-850) and directing arrears.
27.07.2026: High Court hearing and judgment.
The Parties' Positions
Petitioners (UT of J&K & Ors.): Assert that respondent satisfies Section 5 of the 2010 Act - appointed against a clear vacancy, continuous service of 28 years, requisite qualifications, and no pending disciplinary proceedings. Seek regularisation with all benefits and arrears.
Respondent (Aftar Hussain): Argues that regularisation as driver violates SRO 69, which mandates direct recruitment for the driver post; therefore, he is entitled only to the lowest entry-level grade.
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought quash of the CAT orders dated 22.09.2025 and directed regularisation of the respondent in accordance with the statutory framework.
The Legal Issue
Whether an employee engaged on a casual-need or daily-wage basis can be regularised to a post that is statutorily required to be filled by direct recruitment, and if so, what designation and pay grade the employee is entitled to under the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioners
Reliance on Section 5 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010, contending that the respondent meets all criteria - appointment against a clear vacancy, uninterrupted service, requisite qualifications, and clean disciplinary record.
Cite Ashok Kumar v. State of J&K and Piara Singh to argue that long-standing casual service creates a presumption of regular need, warranting regularisation.
Emphasise that the CAT correctly applied the Act and that the respondent’s salary was already paid on a consolidated basis.
For the Respondent
Argue that SRO 69 expressly requires the driver post to be filled by direct recruitment; a casual worker cannot be regularised to that post without violating the rule.
Submit that regularisation must follow the hierarchy of grades, placing the employee in the lowest entry-level grade (orderlies, pay band 345-460) rather than the higher driver grade (475-850).
Cite Ashok Kumar distinction that regularisation cannot be a “right” for casual workers absent a specific rule permitting elevation to a higher post.
The Court's Analysis
The Court began by reaffirming the principle that regularisation cannot be claimed dehors the statutory recruitment rules. It noted that posts designated for direct recruitment must be filled through a transparent, merit-based process to uphold Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. While acknowledging the state’s policy to regularise long-serving casual workers, the Court stressed that such regularisation must conform to the statutory framework.
"On regularisation, he is typically to be absorbed into the lowest entry level grade."
The Court examined Section 5 of the 2010 Act, which conditions regularisation on (i) appointment against a clear vacancy, (ii) continuous service, (iii) requisite qualifications, and (iv) absence of pending disciplinary or criminal proceedings. The respondent satisfied (i) - (iv); however, the Act does not override the specific recruitment rule for the driver post contained in SRO 69, which mandates direct recruitment.
The Court then turned to precedent. In Ashok Kumar v. State of J&K the Court held that casual employees who have served for a “fairly long spell” create a presumption of regular need, obliging the authority to consider regularisation. Yet, the same judgment cautioned that such consideration must be within the confines of the applicable service rules and cannot elevate a casual employee to a higher-grade post reserved for direct recruitment.
Applying these principles, the Court concluded that while the respondent’s 28-year service justified regularisation, the appropriate grade was the lowest entry-level grade for ministerial staff - orderlies (pay band 345-460) - as prescribed by Schedule A to SRO 69. The Tribunal’s direction to regularise him as a driver in the higher pay band 475-850 was therefore an error of law.
The Court also addressed the procedural aspect, ordering that the regularisation be effected within three months of the judgment and that arrears be paid from the date of regularisation till the date of compliance.
The Verdict
The High Court set aside the CAT orders dated 22.09.2025 that had regularised the respondent as driver in pay band 475-850. It directed the appellants to regularise the respondent as orderly in the grade of 345-460, with all benefits and emoluments, and to pay arrears from the date of regularisation. The entire exercise must be completed within three months of the judgment.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Direct-Recruitment Posts Remain Protected
Courts will not allow casual workers to be regularised into posts that statutes expressly reserve for direct recruitment.
Practitioners must examine the specific recruitment rule (e.g., SRO 69) before claiming regularisation to a higher grade.
Long Service Creates a Presumption, Not a Right
A prolonged period of casual service (two-three years or more) triggers a presumption of regular need, but the authority must still place the employee in the lowest entry-level grade applicable.
Cite Ashok Kumar and Piara Singh to argue for regularisation, but limit the claim to the appropriate grade.
Compliance Timelines Are Enforceable
When a court orders regularisation, it may impose a strict deadline (here, three months). Failure to comply can invite contempt proceedings.
Lawyers should advise clients to prepare the necessary service records, arrears calculations, and appointment orders well before the stipulated deadline.
Actionable Takeaways:
Verify the recruitment rule for the post before filing a regularisation petition.
Emphasise the employee’s continuous service and clean disciplinary record, but limit the grade claim to the entry-level grade.
Prepare a detailed arrears computation to satisfy the court’s direction for back-pay.
Monitor compliance deadlines to avoid contempt or further litigation.
