Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SUMAN SHYAM
Ranjit Kumar Neog S/O Makhan Chandra Neog – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. B. Acharyya, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Sarma, learned standing counsel, Oil India Limited (OIL) appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 8 and Mr. R.C. Saikia, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. S. Bora, learned counsel representing the private respondent Nos. 9 to 12. None has appeared for the respondent No. 13.
2. The writ petitioner herein is aggrieved due to non-consideration of his prayer for regularization of services under the Oil India Limited (OIL) even after completing 10 years of contractual service. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that on 26-01-2007 the OIL, Duliajan had issued an advertisement for engaging experienced mechanical engineer on contract basis for a purely temporary requirement for “Pipeline Expansion Project” from Numaligarh to Siliguri (PEP-NSPL). The advertisement itself had mentioned that the contract would be valid for a period of one year or till completion of the project. In response to the advertisement notice dated 26-01-2007, the writ petitioner had submitted his application. After considering his candidature the petitioner was engaged on contract basis as a mechanical engineer
Contractual employees cannot claim regularization of services against permanent vacancies without undergoing a selection process, regardless of the duration of their service.
Contractual employees cannot claim regularization without a formal appointment or established employer-employee relationship.
Contractual employees lack a fundamental right to regularization; such claims must comply with constitutional provisions and relevant recruitment rules.
Longstanding service in a sanctioned post establishes right to regularization despite procedural irregularities in recruitment, supporting equitable treatment of long-term employees.
Temporary or casual employment does not confer legal rights to regularization; adherence to proper recruitment processes is mandatory for permanent appointments.
Continuous and necessary service by contractual employees requires consideration for regularization, transcending mere contractual limitations, provided sanctioned posts exist.
Mere length of service does not vest an employee with a right to seek regularization, especially in the absence of any specific policy. The framing of a scheme for regularization is the prerogative o....
Long-term contractual employees performing essential work are entitled to regularization despite prior undertakings barring such claims, as continuous service establishes the need for employment righ....
The regularization of long-serving contractual employees is mandated when their roles are inherently permanent, ensuring compliance with employment laws and protections against exploitation.
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
