Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Rofi Uz Zaman – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. KN Choudhury, the learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. R R Kakati, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. DP Borah, the learned standing counsel appears on behalf of the Health Department, Government of Assam.
2. The present writ petition has been jointly filed by 36 writ petitioners seeking a direction upon the respondents to frame a scheme for regularization of the services of the petitioners as Dental Surgeons and further seeking directions not to fill up the post of Dental Surgeons as held by the petitioners.
3. From the materials on record, it is seen that pursuant to advertisements being issued vide Notifications dated 22.11.2011, 31.12.2013, 13.10.2014 and 26.06.2015, the petitioners herein were appointed as Dental Surgeons under Regulations 3(f) of the Assam Public Service Commission (Limitation & Function) Regulation, 1951 (for short, the Regulation of 1951). The said appointments were made for a period of 4(four) months and were continued from time to time by granting extension every four months.
4. It is further seen from the records that the Government of Assam in the Health and Family Welfare Department after getting approval
Regularization of services cannot be mandated by courts based on long service; it is within the State's discretion to formulate policies.
In cases of long, continuous service, employees serving in irregular capacities may be regularized despite initial procedural discrepancies, especially in the absence of valid recruitment processes.
The court ruled that contract employees with over ten years of service against sanctioned posts are entitled to regularization, emphasizing the need for fair recruitment processes and age relaxation ....
Regularization of services for employees who have served for over ten years is a right that must be considered by the state, provided there are no valid objections, and the state must adhere to its o....
Prolonged service of over ten years without legal hindrance can qualify employees for regularization, regardless of the initial nature of their appointments.
The court established that long-term service and existing vacancies can warrant regularization, even if initial appointments were irregular, provided the employees meet certain criteria.
The extension of the policy for the private respondents was arbitrary and the regularization violated the 2010 Rules. The Court emphasized that no employee can be permanently appointed on a public po....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
