SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Raj) 916

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.
Ramdhani Yadav S/o Shri Ramchandra Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj And Rural Development Department and ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14298/2019, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10613/2019, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11413/2019, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13128/2019, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13131/2019, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13440/2019, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15498/2019
Decided On : 08-10-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Achal Singh Saluja for Mr. R.S. Saluja
For the Respondent: Ms. Neelam Sharma, AGC

IMPORTANT POINT
Long-term temporary employees are entitled to regularization and benefits under constitutional provisions ensuring equality and fair treatment.

Headnote:

Regularization - Employment - Article 14, Article 39(d), Article 43 - The court interpreted the constitutional provisions regarding equal treatment and fair wages, emphasizing the right to regularization for long-serving temporary employees, influencing its decision to grant the petitioner's request for regularization and benefits.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner served as a temporary employee for 40 years, seeking regularization and pension after superannuation, arguing that his long service warranted equal treatment under the law.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner had continuously served in a capacity similar to a regular employee and that the state had failed to regularize his position despite multiple requests.

Issues: Whether the petitioner, having served for 40 years, is entitled to regularization and pension benefits despite being initially appointed on a temporary basis.

Ratio Decidendi: Long-term service in a temporary capacity can be deemed substantive, warranting regularization and benefits under constitutional provisions ensuring equality and fair treatment.

Result: The writ petition is allowed, directing regularization and release of pension benefits for the petitioner.

ORDER :

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the controversy involved in present cases is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6469/2020 “Kanhiya lal Nai Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.” decided on 30.09.2022 in the following terms:-

    “Briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as 'Gate Keeper' vide order dated 05.08.1981 in Panchayat Samiti, Lunkaransar on temporary basis. The petitioner joined services on 14.08.1981 which were extended from time to time. In the year 1992, a resolution was adopted in the meeting of Panchyat Samiti, Lunkaransar dated 23.10.1992 whereby the petitioner was appointed on the post of 'Octroi Collector'.

After abolishment of octroi in the State of Rajasthan, the Chief Executive Officer, Zila parishad, Bikaner enquired about the status of employees working at Gram Panchayat, Lunkaransar providing services related to octroi collection and consequently, had been rendered surplus. The Gram Panchayat, Lunkaransar furnished necessary details pertaining to all the employees who had been rendered surplus to the Zila Parishad, Bikaner.

An order dated 06.08.1998, was passed by the State Government stating inter alia that the employees who were working in connection with collection and management of octroi shall not be retrenched from services. Subsequently, the petitioner continued in the employment of Gram Panchayat, Lunkaransar uninterruptedly from the date of initial appointment i.e.14.08.1981. The Zila Parishad, Bikaner vide letter dated23.11.2007, forwarded a list of employees working in various Gram Panchayats falling under its jurisdiction for accommodation of employees on other posts who were rendered surplus due to abolition of octroi in the State of Rajasthan.

The Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Government of Rajasthan vide order dated 27.11.2016 allowed minimum pay-scale of class-IV to employees, who were discharging duties similar to the petitioner, after abolition of octroi. However, the name of the petitioner did not find a mention in the said list. The grievance raised in the present writ petition is that his services had been utilized by the respondent-department for40 years without any break yet the same had not been regularised, in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had continuously worked in the respondent-department for almost 40 years discharging duties in similar fashion as of a regular class-IV employee.

It was further submitted that Gram Panchayat, Lunkaransar and Zila Parishad, Bikaner had time and again requested the State Government through various communications along with furnishing necessary details, pertaining to the services discharged by the petitioner in the department for the purposes of regularisation but to no avail. Counsel also submitted that the petitioner had discharged duties in the respondent-department against the post of class-IV employee which were perennial in nature and it would be thus in violation of Article 39(d) r/w with Article 43 of the Constitution of India if regularisation of the petitioner in the pay scale applicable for employees working against class-IV posts is not allowed to him. Counsel urged that the petitioner during pendency of the writ petition had stood superannuated from services in the month of October 2021,therefore, respondents may be directed to release pension and other retiral benefits by regularising petitioner's services from the year 1981.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was not appointed through regular mode of selection for class-IV post. It was also submitted that the petitioner was engaged by Gram Panchayat, Lunkaransar for collection of octroi on temporary basis, therefore after abolition of octroi in normal cours

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top