Srinagar, May 27: The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has stayed fresh recruitment at the University of Kashmir while terming backdoor appointments in public service as a “fraud on the Constitution” and a practice shaped by “cheap political motives”, a media report said.
The court was hearing petitions filed by three contractual junior engineers who have been working with the university since 2017 on a consolidated monthly wage of Rs 15,000. The petitioners had challenged a recruitment advertisement issued by the university on March 30 for multiple posts, including Junior Engineer positions, seeking continuation in service and regularisation.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Sanjay Parihar, as reported by The Indian Express, dismissed the plea for regularisation but allowed the petitioners to participate in the fresh selection process. The court also ordered that the ongoing recruitment process be kept in abeyance.
https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?gdpr=0&us_privacy=1—&gpp_sid=-1&client=ca-pub-4727215842482068&output=html&h=307&slotname=9795112818&adk=844766287&adf=4279585826&pi=t.ma~as.9795112818&w=368&fwrn=7&fwrnh=0&lmt=1779893888&rafmt=1&armr=3&format=368×307&url=https%3A%2F%2Falfaazthewords.in%2Fhigh-court-stays-ku-recruitment-calls-backdoor-appointments-fraud-on-constitution%2F&host=ca-host-pub-2644536267352236&fwr=0&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&sfro=1&asro=0&aiactd=0&aicctd=0&ailctd=0&aimartd=4&aieuf=1&aicrs=1&uach=WyJBbmRyb2lkIiwiMTYuMC4wIiwiIiwiMjQwNkVSTjlDSSIsIjEzOS4wLjcyNTguMTQzIixudWxsLDEsbnVsbCwiIixbWyJOb3Q7QT1CcmFuZCIsIjk5LjAuMC4wIl0sWyJHb29nbGUgQ2hyb21lIiwiMTM5LjAuNzI1OC4xNDMiXSxbIkNocm9taXVtIiwiMTM5LjAuNzI1OC4xNDMiXV0sMF0.&abgtt=7&dt=1779893887939&bpp=26&bdt=1023&idt=587&shv=r20260521&mjsv=m202605220101&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3De49e9a4bae3f1a26%3AT%3D1773500104%3ART%3D1779892977%3AS%3DALNI_MbNrEQZBqSVcl5sp_gCFSt7o5D5RA&gpic=UID%3D0000121d126a9e21%3AT%3D1773500104%3ART%3D1779892977%3AS%3DALNI_Ma8CGT_SyEX-CC4hDoRaicc-7hSFA&eo_id_str=ID%3D34b3e24413cd5337%3AT%3D1773500104%3ART%3D1779892977%3AS%3DAA-AfjaUueqhNP0gsJGdLzPSRTUM&prev_fmts=0x0&nras=1&correlator=7346377200241&frm=20&pv=1&rplot=4&u_tz=330&u_his=1&u_h=895&u_w=393&u_ah=895&u_aw=393&u_cd=24&u_sd=2.75&dmc=4&adx=12&ady=1094&biw=392&bih=736&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=31098652%2C95390668%2C95390788%2C31098763%2C95391807&oid=2&pvsid=8154981134174821&tmod=1215965267&uas=0&nvt=1&fc=1920&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C393%2C0%2C393%2C737%2C392%2C736&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7CopEebr%7C&abl=CS&pfx=0&fu=128&bc=31&bz=1&pgls=CAEaAzcuMA..~CAEQBBoHMS4xNzkuMA..&bisch=1&blev=0.19&ifi=2&uci=a!2&btvi=1&fsb=1&dtd=822
In its observations, the court held that ad hoc, contractual and temporary appointments made without advertisement or competitive selection, followed later by regularisation policies, undermine constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 16. It described such practices as a “pick and choose” system that deprives eligible candidates of equal opportunity in public employment.
The bench noted that successive governments have followed a recurring pattern of engaging “handpicked” individuals on temporary or contractual basis under the pretext of administrative necessity, and later absorbing them through executive orders, statutory rules or legislative measures. It said this approach weakens the principle of equality before law.
The court further observed that regularisation of such appointments, regardless of the method used, amounts to bypassing fair selection procedures. It rejected the petitioners’ argument based on long service, holding that continuation in service under an irregular process does not create a legal right to regularisation.
https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?gdpr=0&us_privacy=1—&gpp_sid=-1&client=ca-pub-4727215842482068&output=html&h=307&slotname=9795112818&adk=844766287&adf=2106955631&pi=t.ma~as.9795112818&w=368&fwrn=7&fwrnh=0&lmt=1779893888&rafmt=1&armr=3&format=368×307&url=https%3A%2F%2Falfaazthewords.in%2Fhigh-court-stays-ku-recruitment-calls-backdoor-appointments-fraud-on-constitution%2F&host=ca-host-pub-2644536267352236&fwr=0&rpe=1&resp_fmts=3&sfro=1&asro=0&aiactd=0&aicctd=0&ailctd=0&aimartd=4&aieuf=1&aicrs=1&uach=WyJBbmRyb2lkIiwiMTYuMC4wIiwiIiwiMjQwNkVSTjlDSSIsIjEzOS4wLjcyNTguMTQzIixudWxsLDEsbnVsbCwiIixbWyJOb3Q7QT1CcmFuZCIsIjk5LjAuMC4wIl0sWyJHb29nbGUgQ2hyb21lIiwiMTM5LjAuNzI1OC4xNDMiXSxbIkNocm9taXVtIiwiMTM5LjAuNzI1OC4xNDMiXV0sMF0.&abgtt=7&dt=1779893887939&bpp=11&bdt=1023&idt=603&shv=r20260521&mjsv=m202605220101&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3De49e9a4bae3f1a26%3AT%3D1773500104%3ART%3D1779892977%3AS%3DALNI_MbNrEQZBqSVcl5sp_gCFSt7o5D5RA&gpic=UID%3D0000121d126a9e21%3AT%3D1773500104%3ART%3D1779892977%3AS%3DALNI_Ma8CGT_SyEX-CC4hDoRaicc-7hSFA&eo_id_str=ID%3D34b3e24413cd5337%3AT%3D1773500104%3ART%3D1779892977%3AS%3DAA-AfjaUueqhNP0gsJGdLzPSRTUM&prev_fmts=0x0%2C368x307&nras=1&correlator=7346377200241&frm=20&pv=1&rplot=4&u_tz=330&u_his=1&u_h=895&u_w=393&u_ah=895&u_aw=393&u_cd=24&u_sd=2.75&dmc=4&adx=12&ady=2052&biw=392&bih=736&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=31098652%2C95390668%2C95390788%2C31098763%2C95391807&oid=2&pvsid=8154981134174821&tmod=1215965267&uas=0&nvt=1&fc=1920&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C393%2C0%2C393%2C737%2C392%2C736&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7CopEebr%7C&abl=CS&pfx=0&fu=128&bc=31&bz=1&pgls=CAEaAzcuMA..~CAEQBBoHMS4xNzkuMA..&bisch=1&blev=0.19&ifi=3&uci=a!3&btvi=2&fsb=1&dtd=825
Referring to past policies, including rules and enactments governing daily wagers and contractual employees in the region, the court noted that such frameworks have repeatedly been used to convert temporary engagements into permanent posts without open competition, affecting merit-based recruitment.
