Smt Shakandi Devi vs Forest Department

:: 1 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

Reserved on 25.09.2026
Central Administrative Tribunal
Jammu Bench, Jammu

Hearing through video conferencing

O.A. No. 61/471/2022

th
Pronounced on :- This the 12 day of October 2026
Hon’ble Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Judicial Member
Hon’ble Ms. Pragya Sahay Saksena, Administrative Member

1. Smt. Shakandi Devi, Age 47 years, W/o Sh. Subash Chander,
R/o Village Salyota, Tehsil Akhnoor, District Jammu.
2. Miss Sonam Sharma, Age 21 years, D/o Late Sh. Subash
Chander Sharma, R/o Village Salyota, Tehsil Akhnoor, District
Jammu
...Applicant

(Through Advocate: Mr. O P Thakur, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. R K
S Thakur)

Versus

1. UT of J&K through Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Forest
Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu. Ministry of Forest
Ecology and Environment Department, J&K.
2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Van Bhawan, Jammu.
3. Chief Conservator of Forest, Dogra Hall, Jammu.
4. Principal Forest Guards, Training School, Doomi Akhnoor.
5. Conservator of Forest, Working Plan Circle, Jammu.
…Respondents

(Through Advocate: Mr. Sudesh Magotra, A.A.G./Sumant Sudan)




ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 2 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

O R D E R
Per:- Sanjeev Gupta, Judicial Member

The brief facts of the case are that one Subash Chander
Sharma, (hereinafter called deceased), was appointed as a Cook on
daily wage basis in July 1990 in the Forest Guard Training School,
Doomi, Akhnoor, under the Forest Department and performed his
duties regularly and continuously. It is averred in the Original
Application (in short O.A.) that under the SRO 64 of 1994) - J&K Daily
Rated Workers/Work Charge Employees (Regularization) Rules, 1994,
any person performing duties as a daily wager continuously for 7
years was entitled to be regularized on a permanent basis. The
deceased completed 7 years of service as on 31.3.1998, thus becoming
eligible for regularization with effect from 1.4.1998. It is further
averred that during his service, deceased suffered from serious illness,
which resulted in breaks totalling 206 days between 1995-96 and
1998-99. That his superiors repeatedly recommended that these
breaks be condoned, observing that the breaks were solely due to his
ailing health, which were supported by medical certificates and his
overall performance as a daily rated worker had remained outstanding
and he was working round the clock as a Mess Cook for trainees. It is
further averred that his case for regularization was processed and
submitted multiple times between 2004 and 2019, with all requisite
documentation including muster rolls, service history, continuity
certificates, eligibility certificates, wage payment certificates, and
medical certificates. It is further averred that in August 2018, it was
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 3 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

confirmed by respondents that deceased was the sole daily rated
worker who was engaged prior to 1994 and whose all particulars and
certificates stood submitted.
2. That despite all required information and documentation being
provided, his regularization was never finalized. Additionally, his
wages were not paid from February 2019 onwards, leaving unpaid
wages amounting to Rs. 94,500/-. Unfortunately, Subash Chander
Sharma passed away on 12.3.2020 due to illness, before his
regularization could be completed. Subsequently, his widow (applicant
No. 1 herein) submitted an application on 21.5.2020 before the
respondents seeking compassionate appointment for their daughter
(applicant No. 2 herein), who holds a 10+2 qualification, but to no
avail. It is averred that later the applicants came to know that since
the deceased had not been regularized, the case for compassionate
appointment of applicant No. 2 was not covered by SRO 43 of 1994.
3. Now, the applicants are before this Tribunal by way of this O.A.,
seeking regularization of services of the deceased on a permanent
basis with effect from 1.4.1998, along with all consequential benefits
including arrears of pay, seniority, in-situ promotions and pension as
well as the compassionate appointment of applicant No. 2 in terms of
SRO 43 of 1994, on the ground that the deceased was entitled to
regularization. The applicants have prayed for following reliefs in the
O.A.:-
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 4 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

“a) Directing the respondents to regularize the services of the
husband of the applicant No. 1 and father of applicant
No.2 Late Sh. Subash Chander Sharma, on regular basis
as helper with effect from 1-4-1998 with all consequential
benefits i.e. arrears of pay, salary, seniority and other
benefits including grant of in-situ promotion and also
further promotion.
b) Directing the respondents to grant the family pension to
the applicant No. 1 with arrears.
c) Directing the respondents to consider and appoint the
applicant No. 2 against any available post in terms of SRO
43 of 1994 in as much as she was acquired the 10+2
qualification.
d) Such other additional or alternate relief which this
Hon’ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the
case deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the
applicants and against the respondents.”

4. The respondents No. 1 to 5 have filed reply mainly stating
therein that the deceased was a Casual Labour and not a daily rated
worker and he had not completed continuous seven years of service
which is one of the essential mandatory conditions prescribed under
SRO 64 of 1994, so as to be entitled for regularization and since, he
was not regularized the demand of his legal heirs for consequential
benefits and compassionate appointment is unjustified.
5. In the reply filed by Respondent No.6 , it has been stated that
its role is limited to the authorization of pensionary benefits in respect
of retired J&K, UT Government employees whose pension case, duly
completed in all respects, are submitted to it for authorization of
pensionary benefits, as such, it has no role to execute in redressal of
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 5 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

the grievance of the applicants, which pertains to regularization and
compassionate appointment.
6. Mr. O P Thakur, learned Sr. Counsel for the applicants
contended that the deceased was engaged as a daily rated worker in
July 1990 and completed 07 years of continuous service by June
1997. As per the learned Sr. Counsel, under the provisions of SRO 64
of 1994, any person performing duties as a daily wager continuously
for 7 years becomes eligible for regularization on a permanent basis.
Therefore, deceased was entitled to be regularized with effect from
1.4.1998,
7. Learned Sr. Counsel further submits that during 1995-1999,
the deceased suffered from serious illness resulting in 206 days of
breaks, which were entirely beyond his control. Requisite medical
certificates was provided to support this claim and these medical
records were submitted to all the higher authorities, including
respondent No. 1. The Respondents No. 2 to 5 have categorically
recommended that these breaks deserve to be condoned. As per the
learned Sr. Counsel, break in service on account of health issues, duly
supported by medical certificates, cannot be held against an
employee's regularization prospects. Therefore, the respondents ought
to have condoned these breaks and proceeded with regularization of
the applicants.
8. Learned Sr. Counsel further contended that the respondent
authorities have failed to accord consideration to the case of the
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 6 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

deceased employee for his regularization in terms of SRO 64 of 1994
and the respondents cannot deny the benefits of regularization by
misinterpreting the provisions of SRO 64 of 1994, more so, when there
was recommendation in favour of the deceased employee for his
regularization. It has further been stated that the deceased was
engaged as Daily Wager, prior to the cut off date of 31.03.1994, which
was further extended to 06.11.2001 and, is, therefore, entitled for
regularization in terms of SRO 64. During the course of arguments,
learned Sr. Counsel has placed reliance on the Division Bench
judgement of Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in State of
others Vs. Mushtaq Ahmed Sohail and another 2013 SLJ 74
9. Learned Sr. counsel contends that applicant no. 2, who is a
graduate and being the legal heir of the deceased who died in harness,
is entitled to compassionate appointment under SRO 43 of 1994. The
deceased was due for regularization on 01.04.1998 but died on
12.03.2020 while awaiting regularization. The applicants are now in
severe financial distress and destitution, having been the sole
dependents of the deceased. The learned counsel in support of his
submissions has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble High
Court in the case of Sureksha Rani vs. State of J&K: 1999 KLJ 24 ,
Mohammad Rafiq Tandyal Vs. UT of J&K and others – WP (C) No.
1046 of 2022 (delivered on 05.06.2026) and Bikramjeet Singh Vs.
State of J&K and others in SWP No. 2268 of 2003 .
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 7 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

10. Lastly, the learned Sr. counsel prayed that the O.A. be allowed
and consequently, the services of the deceased employee be
regularized w.e.f. 01.04.1998 under SRO 64 of 1994 with all
consequential benefits and applicant No. 2 be granted appointment on
compassionate grounds under SRO 43 of 1994.
11. On the other hand, Mr. Sudesh Magotra, learned A.A.G.
appearing for the respondents submitted that the deceased was a
Casual Labourer and not a Daily Rated Worker and therefore, the
provisions of SRO 64 of 1994 were not applicable to his case. He
further submitted that the deceased had not completed seven years of
continuous service, which is one of the essential and mandatory
conditions prescribed under SRO 64 of 1994 so as to be entitled for
regularization on permanent basis, and therefore his case for
regularization was not maintainable.
12. Learned A.A.G. contended that since the deceased had failed to
fulfill the essential condition prescribed under SRO 64 of 1994, his
services could not be regularized and consequently, no entitlement to
any consequential benefits whatsoever can arise in his favour either
during his lifetime or after his death.
13. Learned A.A.G. further submitted that since the deceased was
not regularized during his lifetime owing to non-fulfillment of the
statutory conditions, the claim of his legal heirs for consequential
benefits including arrears of pay, seniority, in-situ promotions,
gratuity, leave encashment, provident fund, pensionary benefits, and
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 8 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

appointment on compassionate ground is wholly unjustified and is not
sustainable in law.
14. Heard the learned counsels for both the parties at length and
carefully perused the records.
15. The foremost and important controversy to be adjudicated in
the present case is whether deceased was a Casual Labourer or a
Daily Rated Worker, as the resolution of this question will determine
the eligibility of the deceased for regularization under SRO 64 of 1994.
16. The respondents have taken a categorical stand that the
deceased was a Casual Labourer and not a Daily Rated Worker, and
therefore the provisions of SRO 64 of 1994 were not applicable to his
case. However, we find this argument to be factually unsustainable as
it is contradicted by respondents' own official records and
communications. A careful examination of the documentary records
annexed with the O.A. reveals that throughout all official
correspondence, reports, recommendations, and records maintained
and generated by the Forest Department, spanning a period from
1990 to 2020, deceased has been referred to and described as a Daily
Rated Worker. Perusal of Annexure A/2 reveals that in 2004,
Respondent No. 4 while forwarding the case of the deceased to
Respondent No. 2 for condonation of breaks and regularization, has
specifically mentioned designation of the deceased as Daily Rated
Worker. A similar stand has been taken in communication dated
20.03.2008 (Annexure A/3) issued by Respondent No. 2 addressed to
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 9 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

Respondent No. 1. Similarly, in the information including CVITV
sheets and medical certificates provided by respondent No. 4 to
respondent No. 5 vide communication dated 02.12.2010 (Annexure
A/4) reflects the deceased as Daily Rated Worker. In the
information/details including initial muster roll of 7/1990, service
history, continuity certificate, eligibility certificate, wage payment
certificate, and medical certificates, furnished to respondent No. 1 by
respondent No. 2 vide communication dated 16.3.2013 (Annexure-A-
9), the deceased had been shown as one of the daily rated worker.
Similarly in 2018, Respondent No. 4 vide letter dated 2.8.2018
(Annexure-A/10) confirmed that the deceased was the only daily rated
worker from his institution engaged prior to 1994 and whose
particulars alongwith requisite certificates stood submitted.
17. Notably, these are the respondents' own documents. It is a well-
settled principle that a party cannot be permitted to approbate and
reprobate simultaneously. The respondent authorities, having
themselves consistently designated the deceased as a Daily Rated
Worker in their own official records over a period of three decades,
cannot now be permitted to turn around and contend that he was a
Casual Labourer in order to deny him the benefits of regularization.
18. The Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh in a
catena of cases has deprecated the practice of respondents’
department of calling workers serving them for decades together as
casual workers, and denying them the benefit of regularization under
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 10 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

SRO 64 of 1994. In the case of Mushtaq Ahmed Sohail (supra), the
Hon’ble High Court has categorically held that a person, who has been
a whole time worker and has been rendering services for decades
together, cannot be termed as casual labourer so as to deny him the
benefit of regularization envisaged under SRO 64 of 1994. Similarly, in
the case of Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and others Vs.
Mohd. Akbar Batt and others decided on 16.02.2026 , the Hon’ble
High Court has held as under:-
“06. This Court has time and again deprecated and spurned
the stand of the petitioners that the workers serving the State
and its departments for decades together were the casual
workers, not entitled to the benefit of regularization under SRO
64 of 1994. It has been made known to the petitioners that a
person, who is a whole time worker and has been in the
continuous service of the State for the last more than seven
years cannot, by any stretch of reasoning, be called a casual
worker. A 'casual worker' is one, who is engaged to perform the
duties, which are casual and not perennial in nature. Similarly,
'seasonal labourer' is one, who is engaged for a particular
season for discharging a particular nature of duties and is not
engaged for the entire month and entire year.
07. We are constrained to observe that despite there being a
number of judgments clarifying the aforesaid issue, the
petitioners are still taking an obdurate stand in the petitions to
deny the genuine claim of the daily wagers, who have earned a
right of regularization under SRO 64 of 1994.”
19. Accordingly, the contention of the respondents that deceased
was a Casual Labourer is, therefore, liable to be rejected outright.
20. The next issue that falls for consideration is whether the
deceased completed seven years of continuous service, which is
admittedly the essential and mandatory condition prescribed under
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 11 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

SRO 64 of 1994 for regularization on a permanent basis. Indisputably,
deceased was engaged as a cook on daily wage basis in July 1990 in
the Forest Guard Training School, Doomi, Akhnoor, under the Forest
Department. It is also not disputed that during his service, deceased
suffered from serious illness, which resulted in service breaks totalling
206 days between 1995-96 and 1998-99. However, the crucial facts
emerging from the record, which must be noted are that medical
certificates were duly furnished to support the claim of illness and the
Drawing and Disbursing Officer, vide letter dated 5.4.2004 (Annexure-
A/2), informed the higher authorities that the breaks were solely on
account of the ailing health of the deceased. Respondents No. 2 to 5
have, on multiple occasions and consistently, recommended
condonation of these breaks and regularization of his services.
21. In our considered view service breaks caused by ill-health and
illness, which are entirely beyond the control of an employee and are
duly certified by medical authorities, cannot be held against the
employee and used to deny the benefit of regularization. In the case of
Shri Bahadur Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others
decided by Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court on 07.04.2026 ,
the Hon’ble High Court had held that that the shortfall in service was
due to circumstance beyond the control of the petitioner therein and
observed that considering his long prior service, the department
should have condoned this minor lapse and regularized his service.
The relevant portion of the judgement is reproduced below:-
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 12 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

“10. In the present case, as the date of joining of the petitioner
as a daily wager with effect from 01.07.1995 is an
admitted position, obviously, while calculating his
eligibility for regularization, the number of days he had
put in the year 1995, were also to be taken into
consideration. Besides this, the shortfall of eight days for
completion of 240 days in the year 2003, was not on
account of any omission or commission on the part of the
petitioner. It was for reasons beyond the control of the
petitioner as he was bitten by a snake, on account
whereof, he could not attend the work. In these peculiar
circumstances, interest of justice demanded that the eight
days shortfall in completion of 240 days, should have
been condoned by the Department.”
22. Furthermore, perusal of the file reveals that the Drawing and
Disbursing Officer of the Forest Guard Training School, in his letter
dated 2.12.2010 (Annexure-A/4), categorically reported that the
deceased had completed 7 years of service as on 31.3.1998. Besides,
Respondent No. 2, in its communication dated 20.2.2008 (Annexure-
A/3), also confirmed that the deceased was engaged in July 1990
prior to the imposition of ban and had completed 7 years of service as
on 31.3.1998. Hence, the contention of the respondents that deceased
had not completed seven years of continuous service is, therefore,
contradicted by their own official communications. Having confirmed
completion of 7 years of service in their own official records, the
respondents cannot now be permitted to take a U-turn from that
position to defeat the legitimate rights of the deceased and his legal
heirs.
23. Now, coming to the claim of applicant No. 2 for compassionate
appointment, it is noted that SRO 43 of 1994 provides for
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 13 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

compassionate appointment to the dependents of government
employees who die in harness. The contention of the respondents that
the case for compassionate appointment of applicant No. 2 is not
covered by SRO 43 of 1994, since the deceased was not regularized
during his lifetime is, in the considered opinion of this Tribunal,
legally untenable. The right to compassionate appointment flows from
the fact of the employee's death in harness and his entitlement to
regularization, and not merely from the fact of formal regularization.
Since, it has been established that the deceased was entitled to
regularization after completion of seven years of service, his death
while in service constitutes a death in harness for all practical
purposes, thus entitling his dependents to seek compassionate
appointment.
24. In the case of Sureksha Rani (supra), the husband of petitioner
therein, who was employed as daily wager died in service, the Hon’ble
High Court has held that benefit under SRO 43 of 1994 is not for the
benefit of regular employees or temporary government employees
alone and that the husband of the petitioner was working on daily
wages, and performing duties in connection with affairs of State of
Jammu and Kashmir. She would be as such entitled to the benefits of
rules contained in SRO 43 of 1994.
25. The Hon'ble High Court in Bikramjeet Singh (supra) specifically
held that since the deceased had completed seven years of service
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 14 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

before his death, the respondents were bound to issue an
appointment order in favour of the petitioner therein.
26. In the recent judgement of Hon’ble High Court, Mohammad
Rafiq Tandyal (supra) case, the Hon’ble High Court has held that in a
case where a Daily Rated Worker has acquired right for consideration
of regularization before his death, his dependent will have a right to be
considered for compassionate appointment under SRO 43 of 1994.
27. As already observed in preceding paras, deceased had
completed around 30 years of continuous service and he had
acquired right to regularization of his services in the year 1998, but he
died in harness on 12.03.2020 while awaiting regularization, despite
his case was referred several times for regularization. Having regard to
facts of the case as well as judicial precedents cited above, we hold
that applicant no. 2 is clearly entitled to consideration of her case for
compassionate appointment under SRO 43 of 1994, and the
respondents are duty-bound to consider her claim.
28. Accordingly, the O.A. is allowed with the following directions:-
i. The respondents are directed to regularize the services of
the deceased (Late Sh. Subash Chander Sharma), on
regular basis as Helper w.e.f. 01.04.1998 with all
consequential benefits, i.e. arrears of pay, salary, seniority
and other benefits including grant of promotions, whether
in situ or otherwise.
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR

:: 15 :: O.A. No. 61/471/2022

ii. The respondents are further directed to grant family
pension to applicant No. 1 with arrears.
iii. The respondents are also directed to consider and
appoint, applicant No.2 against any available post in
terms of SRO 43 of 1994, keeping in view her qualification
of 10+2.
29. Let the aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
30. No order as to costs.


(Pragya Sahay Saksena) (Sanjeev Gupta)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Arun…
ARUN
KUMAR
2026.10.16
08:56:35
+05'30'
ARUN
KUMAR