4 min readNew DelhiJan 30, 2026 01:21 PM IST
First published on: Jan 30, 2026 at 01:09 PM IST
Jammu and Kashmir High Court News: The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently ruled that the government cannot question an employee’s appointment or regularisation after allowing him to serve for over two decades and retire honourably, while upholding the direction to release all retiral benefits to an employee whose appointment was challenged by the state.
Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal noted that the authority concerned continued to extract work from the employee for over two decades, and held that the benefits claimed by him are earned through “long service” and not granted as “charity.”
The bench pointed out that if the appointment was illegal, the appropriate proceedings for termination of services should have been initiated at an earlier point in time. (Image is enhanced using AI)
The bench was hearing the appeal filed by the state challenging the trial court’s order, which directed the authority concerned to release all the retirement benefits, including the arrears, in favour of the employee named Gulzar Ahmad Khan within a period of two months.
“Instead, the appellants continued to extract work from the respondent for over two decades and the benefits, he claims, are earned through long service and not granted as charity. Having failed to act in time and allowing him to retire honourably, the appellants cannot now challenge his initial appointment or subsequent regularisation,” the court said.
The authority concurred was challenging the trial court’s order, arguing that the employee was not entitled to any relief since he was allegedly illegally appointed in 1999, and his regularisation in 2007 was also illegal.
Findings
- Khan attained the age of retirement during the pendency of this petition.
- No proceedings were ever initiated by the authority concerned during his tenure.
- There is nothing on record to demonstrate that any judicial or departmental proceedings are currently pending against him.
- Khan was allowed to serve for nearly 25 years, and it is now too late for the authority concerned to contend that his appointment was “illegal”.
- Even if the appointment was illegal, the appropriate proceedings for termination of Khan’s services should have been initiated at an earlier point of time.
- While the authority concerned claims that all regularisations post-2000 are under investigation by the state crime branch, it is evident that after 14 years, the investigation remains unfinalised without any chargesheet being filed.
- The retired employee is entitled to interest on all retirement benefits and arrears at the rate of 6% per annum.
- The authority concerned should calculate the interest from the date the employee first became entitled to these benefits until the date of actual payment.
Arguments
- Government advocate Illyas N Laway argued that the trial court passed the order in favour of the employee without considering the submissions made on behalf of the authority concerned.
- It was further contended that the issue relating to illegal appointments was under investigation by the state crime branch, along with an enquiry conducted by the authority concerned, and that under such circumstances, the employee was not entitled to any relief.
- On the other hand, Khan’s counsel, advocate M A Beigh, submitted that no chargesheet has been filed against his client till date, and that the state never initiated any action against him during his service tenure and instead allowed him to attain superannuation.
Jammu and Kashmir High Court News: The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court found that the trial court directed the authority concerned to release the retired employee's pension benefits within two months. (Image is created using AI) 
The bench pointed out that if the appointment was illegal, the appropriate proceedings for termination of services should have been initiated at an earlier point in time. (Image is enhanced using AI)
Share
