ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The respondent was employed with the appellant company as a daily-rated Mazdoor. He was recruited in the year 1973. He was appointed on regular basis with effect from 11.8.1986. He attained the age of superannuation on 30th August, 1989. Thereafter, again while working on daily-wages, his services were terminated in 1993. He filed a representation for payment of gratuity as also other retiral benefits. He having been denied the retiral benefits on the premise that he had not completed 10 years' qualifying service as required in terms of the Service Rules, he filed an original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal.

3. The said application was allowed inter-alia on the premise that the appellant had formulated a regularisation scheme in the year 1989 in terms whereof the respondent should have been given a permanent status. The High Court has upheld the said view.

4. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others vs. Umadevi and Others, 2006 (4) SCC 1, has categorically held that keeping in view the constitutional scheme of equality, as contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, regularisatio