Benefits Of Regularisation Policy Must Be Equally Granted To All Eligible Employees: Supreme Court
Amisha Shrivastava
27 July 2024 4:05 AM GMT
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 22) observed that while daily wage employees do not have a legally vested right to seek regularisation, benefits of any policy decision for regularization taken by the competent authority must be extended to all eligible individuals.
A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan upheld MP High Court's order directing the regularisation of appointment of a daily wage worker in Government Kalaniketan Polytechnic College, Jabalpur.
“It is true that an employee engaged on daily wages has no legally vested right to seek regularisation of his services. However, if the competent authority takes a policy decision within the permissible framework, its benefit must be extended to all those who fall within the parameters of such a policy. Authorities cannot be permitted to pick and choose in such circumstances”, the Supreme Court observed.
The MP HC, noting that his juniors had been regularised but he wasn't despite recommendation of the Screening Committee, called it a case of hostile discrimination where an employee is required to visit the court five times.
Respondent Shyam Kumar Yadav was initially engaged as a daily-rated employee at the Collectorate rate on November 26, 1993. His services were terminated on May 12, 1995. However, on the recommendation of the Screening Committee, he was reinstated, with the State claiming his reinstatement occurred in 2009, although records show he has been working since 2006.
The core issue in the HC's second round of litigation was whether Yadav was entitled to be absorbed as a regular employee, considering the government policy and his long service as a daily wager. The HC ruled in Yadav's favour. This decision was upheld by the Division Bench of the HC in its order dated March 16, 2018. Thus, the state government approached the Supreme Court challenging the HC's order.
The Supreme Court noted that the affidavits and documents submitted by the petitioner-State, including an affidavit from the Commissioner of Technical Education, Bhopal, were vague, evasive, and misleading.
The Supreme Court observed that Yadav had worked continuously as a daily wager from 2005 to 2009, his eligibility for the post was uncontested, and his initial appointment was in conformity with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Consequently, the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the High Court's order directing the regularisation of Yadav's services.
The Court dismissed State of MP's Special Leave Petition and directed it to grant Yadav all the benefits of regular employment, including arrears of pay and seniority, within three months.
Case no. – Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 25609/2018
Case Title – State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. v. Shyam Kumar Yadav & Anr.
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 515
