State A Model Employer, Can't Use Contractual Appointments To Deny Workers Service Benefits: Himachal Pradesh High Court

A bench of Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Bipin Chander Negi further added that offering contractual appointments at the outset, purely to withhold rightful benefits from employees, is inconceivable from the state.

“Omissions and commissions on the part of the State are arbitrary and such conduct is antithesis the mandates of Article 14 of the Construction of the India, which does not behove to the State, being a Model Employer and protector of rights of people. State cannot and cannot be permitted to act as an exploitative master by cleverly devising a method under the garb of provisions of R & P Rules, by providing contractual appointment at initial stage but depriving service benefits. It is not expected from the State to deprive the employees from their lawful and just benefits emanating from the services rendered by them”.

The case revolved around petitioners who were appointed as Tehsil Welfare Officers on a contractual basis by the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment of the Government of Himachal Pradesh in May 2010. Despite following the mandated rules for recruitment, the state chose to offer only contractual appointments for an initial five-year period, depriving these employees of regular benefits and seniority.

Thus, the petitioners had approached the court seeking various reliefs, including counting their contract service for annual increments, seniority, and pensionary benefits.

The bench condemned the state's exploitative tactics, asserting that it was not permissible for the government to provide contractual appointments just to evade providing rightful benefits to its employees.

Observing that there was no valid or logical explanation provided in the records for the decision to opt for contractual appointments in the initial phase instead of granting regular employment, the court said,

“It appears, in order to avoid its liability to pay salary attached to the post and to deprive the employees from lawful service benefits available to them, exploitative policy of contract appointment for initial five years has been/ and is being adopted and practiced”.

The bench also noted that the State's arbitrary omissions and commissions were a direct contradiction to the principles outlined in Article 14 of the Constitution.

Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the petitioners, allowing them to count their contract service from their initial appointment for seniority, annual increments, and all related benefits. The court directed the respondents to complete this process by December 31, 2023, and disburse arrears in accordance with the Finance Department's instructions.

The court dismissed the argument for restricting monetary benefits to the three years before the petition was filed, as it found no delay in the petitioners' approach to the court, given that they were regularized in May 2016 and approached the court in April 2017.

Case Title: Chaman Lal & others Vs State of H.P. & others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 73

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment