1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 103 OF 2021

TALAT PARVEZ ROHELLA & ORS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

MEENAKSHI DEVI & ORS. Respondent(s)

O R D E R

The appellants are aggrieved against a

direction of the Central Administrative Tribunal (in

short, “Tribunal”), Jammu Bench at Jammu for the

reason that the Tribunal had passed an order dated

24.11.2020 calling upon the officers of the State to

be present so that the charges may be framed under

the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The basis of issuing such a direction arises out

of an interim order of status quo passed by the

Tribunal on 25.06.2020 in the Original Applications

filed by the adhoc/ contractual employees appointed

for the Academic session 2019-2020. The grievance

was that an advertisement has been issued for

engagement of teaching faculty in the Government

Degree College, Jammu Division and, therefore, the

applicants before the Tribunal are threatened to be

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
Jayant Kumar Arora
Date: 2022.05.05
disengaged and replaced by another adhoc/ contractual
16:52:12 IST
Reason:

employees.

The reliance of the appellants was on the policy

 2

decision dated 17.02.2020 wherein guidelines were

issued for engagement of the candidates in the

Government Degree College for the Academic Session

2020-2021. The interim order of the Tribunal is that

adhoc/ contractual employees cannot be replaced by

another adhoc/ contractual employees. Such order was

passed not only in respect of the respondents herein

but in respect of other similarly situated adhoc/

contractual employees.

Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, learned Additional

Solicitor General, has bought to our notice the order

passed by the High Court in W.P. (C) No. 1674 of 2019

on 15.05.2019, wherein the High Court has directed

the State to adhere to the policy dated 08.02.2018.

The said policy is similar to the policy relied upon

by the appellants before the Tribunal on 17.02.2020.

In view of the aforesaid fact, we dispose of the

present appeal with a direction to the Tribunal,

Jammu Bench, or such other Bench which exercises the

jurisdiction over the territory of Jammu and Kashmir,

to decide the original applications filed by the

adhoc/ contractual employees expeditiously and

preferably within a period of three months.

However, in the meantime, all those adhoc/

contractual employees who have been granted the

benefit of the status quo order passed by the

Tribunal shall be given continuity of service and

 3

will not be replaced by another adhoc/ contractual

employees. However, it shall be open to the

appellants to replace such adhoc/ contractual

employees by appointment on regular basis.

This order will be applicable to those applicants

who are before the Tribunal but the Tribunal shall

not grant any such interim order to any other

candidates.

.......................J.
[ HEMANT GUPTA ]

.......................J.
[ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN ]

New Delhi;
MAY 02, 2022.
 4

ITEM NO.33 COURT NO.11 SECTION XVII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal No(s). 103/2021

TALAT PARVEZ ROHELLA & ORS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

MEENAKSHI DEVI & ORS. Respondent(s)

IA No. 122008/2021 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION
IA No. 6826/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT
IA No. 34103/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION
IA No. 102912/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
IA No. 6825/2021 - STAY APPLICATION)

Date : 02-05-2022 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN

For Appellant(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, ASG

Ms. Taruna Ardhendumauli Prasad, AOR
Mr. Parth Awasthi, Adv.
Ms. Shruti Aggarwal, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Dushyant Parashar, AOR

Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Adv.

Ms. Aparna Jha, AOR

Mr. Pranab Kumar Mullick, AOR

Ms. Soma Mullick, Adv.
Mr. Sebat Kumar Deuria, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Application for intervention is allowed.

The Civil Appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed

of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)

COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

(Signed order is placed on the file)