Srinagar, Dec 22: Employees cannot seek to selectively apply the relevant recruitment rules to their liking, Jammu and Kashmir High Court said as it dismissed a petition by J&K Tourism Development Corporation Employees Union, seeking same treatment as given to employees of SKICC in the matter of pension scheme.
“The petitioners cannot seek to selectively apply the relevant recruitment rules to their liking. The petitioners are governed by express statutory rules which set out the terms and conditions of the services of employees, including the petitioners, therefore, the petitioners cannot claim for amendment in the service rules through the medium of the instant petition,” said a bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey while responding in negative to the question that despite there being clear rule position with regard to the services in the Corporation being non-pensionable, can the members of the Union still claim pensionary benefits in their favour on the analogy of other Government Corporations/ Departments.
“The petitioners and other employees of the Corporation cannot deviate from the terms and conditions of service upon which they have been appointed.”
The court said that once an employee accepts the terms and conditions governing a particular service at the time of entry in that service, he/ she subsequently cannot turn around and contend that the certain portion of the rules governing such service is not tenable. “This Court cannot issue directions to the legislature to enact a particular legislation. Same is true as regards the executive when it exercises the power to make rules, which are in the nature of subordinate legislation.”
Referring to the law laid down by the Supreme Court), the bench said it is crystal clear that existence of a right is the foundation of the jurisdiction of a Court to issue a ‘Writ of Mandamus’. “In the case on hand, the petitioners have not been able to show as to which of their right has been violated by the respondents (officials) denying them the pensionary benefits, which can be directed to be enforced by way of issuing a ‘Mandamus’ from this Court,” the court said as per GNS. “In this context, the irrefutable conclusion which can be drawn is that none of the rights of the petitioners stand violated by the respondent Corporation for which a ‘Writ of Mandamus’ can be issued in their favour.”
