Bombay High Court Grants Permanent Status to Long Term Forest Workers at National Park - 2025-09-03

Bombay High Court Grants Permanent Status to Long Term Forest Workers at National Park

In a landmark decision addressing the rights of long-term contract workers, the High Court of Bombay has directed the state’s Forest Department to grant permanent status to 22 "Van Majoor" (forest laborers) working at the Sanjay Gandhi National Park. Presiding over the case, Justice Milind N. Jadhav ruled that the prolonged exploitation of these workers, who had served for decades without social security benefits, was legally untenable.

The Battle for Recognition

The petitioners, who have been employed since the early 2000s, performed critical roles including night patrolling, cleaning wild animal cages, and feeding captive predators like tigers and leopards. Despite their years of service and the fact that their daily duties mirrored those of permanent employees, the petitioners were denied permanency. The Industrial Court had previously dismissed their complaint, citing a lack of sanctioned vacant posts.

Legal Arguments and Precedents

Ms. Jagdale, counsel for the petitioners, successfully argued that the workers had consistently met the threshold of 240 working days per year for several consecutive years. She contended that the denial of permanent status constituted an unfair labor practice.

The state, represented by the Assistant Government Pleader, maintained that the workers were engaged on a temporary, daily-wage basis and that no sanctioned posts were available to absorb them. However, Justice Jadhav rejected the "lack of sanctioned posts" argument as a justification for perpetual exploitation. The Court drew heavily from established precedents, including The Deputy Conservator of Forest Nashik Van Vibhag (E), Nasik and Ors Vs. Nasik Zilla Van Shramik Sangh , emphasizing that the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act must prevail over administrative excuses.

Key Observations

The judgment underscores the judiciary’s role in protecting vulnerable workers. Highlighting the gravity of the situation, the Court remarked:

> "It is seen that there is no difference of opinion that Petitioners’ services as workmen is / was the same as the permanently employed workers of the Forest Department. Hence, they cannot be discriminated."

Addressing the state's reliance on the absence of vacant posts, the Court noted:

> "The reasoning adopted by the learned Industrial Court for denying them permanent status on the ground of they having failed to show existence of sanctioned posts cannot be acceptable neither countenanced. Accepting such a reasoning would amount to continuation of exploitation of Petitioners."

Further, regarding the necessity of protection, the Court observed:

> "If Government's argument is accepted, it would amount to enslavement of these workmen and bonded labour. The Court cannot be a mute spectator to this situation."

The Road to Permanency

The High Court has quashed the order of the Industrial Court and mandated that the Forest Department finalize the computation of outstanding differential wages. The authorities are directed to pay the arrears and implement the benefits of permanent status within ten weeks. This ruling provides a significant legal victory for casual laborers, reinforcing the principle that long-standing, perennial employment creates a statutory right to the benefits of permanent service, regardless of internal departmental excuses regarding sanctioned positions.