Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
NUPUR BHATI
Hasta Ram, S/o. Panna Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition for service regularization. (Para 1) |
| 2. previous cases of identical nature discussed. (Para 2) |
| 3. disposal of writ petition and directions to respondents. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
ORDER :
NUPUR BHATI, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:
“xxxxxxxx
1. That the respondent may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the humble petitioners against the sanctioned vacant posts of Class IV employees (Cook/Guard) which they have been holding for more than ten years, in strict compliance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhola Nath Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. (2026 INSC 99), with all consequential benefits.
2. Issue a writ, order, or direction to quash and set aside any verbal or written orders that may attempt to discontinue the petitioners' services during the pendency of this litigation, holding such actions as arbitrary and retaliatory.
xxxxxxxxx”
2. Counsel for the parties, at the outset, jointly submit that the Coordinate Bench of this Court took up the identical issue; wherein, petitioners who were appointed at various class III and IV posts,
Public employees with irregular but legal appointments, having served over ten years, must be regularized based on established principles of administrative law and rights under the Constitution.
The court established that prolonged denial of regularization for employees with continuous service violates Articles 14 and 21, emphasizing substantive justice and the doctrine of legitimate expecta....
The court established that employees with irregular but not illegal appointments, who have served continuously for over ten years, are entitled to regularization and associated benefits, emphasizing ....
Appointments not being sponsored by the employment exchange, as prescribed under Rule 149(2) of the Rules, would only make the appointments irregular and not illegal.
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....
The court emphasized fair treatment and equal pay, mandating regularization of long-serving employees who were arbitrarily excluded from benefits, thereby reinforcing principles of equality under Art....
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.
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
