HC dismisses daily wagers’ plea for regularisation under SRO 520

Srinagar, Nov 5: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh on Wednesday dismissed petitions by a group of daily wagers wherein they had sought regularisation under SRO 520 of 2017, observing that the inquiry report in this regard was not called in question by the aggrieved.

Under the SRO 520, the government has imposed a ban on such regularisations.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani noted that the authorities cannot be said to have faulted in the matter or infringed any of the rights of the petitioners in view of the inquiry report that had not been objected to or challenged.

The court said this after hearing counsel for petitioners, besides G A Fahim Shah and Advocate Tassaduq Hussain.

The fundamental grievance projected by the petitioners was that they were engaged and have been working as daily rated workers with the authorities and that their names were included in the list of daily wagers earlier, the court said.

However, they said, later their names were not included in the list of permanent daily labourers or temporary daily labourers framed by the authorities, with non-inclusion depriving them from seeking their regularisation in terms of SRO 520 of 2017.

On the other hand, the grievance of the petitioners was vehemently opposed and resisted by the authorities primarily on the basis of a report of the Inquiry Committee constituted by the Managing Director Operations and Maintenance of Kashmir Power Distribution Limited (KPDCL).

The authorities contended that none of the rights of petitioners had been infringed or violated, while admitting that they were engaged on a temporary basis and that, as and when required, they were paid the wages for the period they worked.

They said that the petitioners’ CVs had been found prepared after the imposition of the ban imposed by the government vide order dated March 17, 2025, as such, their names were not forwarded to the higher authorities for further necessary action.

While the court noted that the report of the inquiry committee indisputably had not been either objected to by the petitioners till date, it said the respondents cannot be said to have faulted in the matter or else infringed any of the rights of the petitioners, entitling them to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the court.