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

2025 Supreme(HP) 1329

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
Subhash Kumar and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Another – Respondents
C.W.P. Nos. 10354, 10398, 10587, 10771, 10772, 10775, 10801, 11004, 11005, 11006, 11007 of 2023, C.W.P. No. 05 of 2024
Decided On : 01-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Onkar Jairath, Piyush Mehta
For the Respondents: Anup Rattan, Rajan Kahol, Vishal Panwar, B.C. Verma, Ravi Chauhan

Contractual skilled employees with over 18 years continuous service and regular pay scale entitled to regularization despite scheme funding, as state cannot exploit long-term labour under temporary labels violating equality and non-discrimination.

Headnote:(A) Service Law - Regularization of contractual employees - Computer operators engaged on contract basis pursuant to government notification creating specific posts in development blocks and rural development agencies, rendering continuous service for over 18 years, granted regular pay scale with allowances from 2017 - Entitled to regularization despite remuneration from centrally sponsored scheme funds, as engagement not for unskilled manual work under scheme object, state as model employer cannot exploit long service or deny parity to similarly situated regularized persons, violates Articles 14 and 16. (Paras 2, 4, 18-22, 28-32, 36)

(B) Constitutional Law - Articles 14 and 16 - State cannot use temporary labels or outsourcing for perennial work, financial stringency no bar to fairness, long-term ad-hocism deprecated, sanctioned posts to be created reflecting need. (Paras 14-16, 25-27, 35-36)

Facts of the case:
Contractual computer operators appointed in 2007-2008 against posts created by notification, completed 6 years service by 2014 entitling to regularization under policy, repeatedly represented but denied on ground of centrally sponsored scheme funding and co-terminus engagement, though granted regular pay scale from 2017 and similarly situated persons regularized pursuant to court directions.

Findings of Court:
Services of petitioners to be regularized with effect from date regular pay scale granted i.e. 9th October 2017, period to count for seniority.

Issues: Whether contractual employees rendering skilled work for extended periods under scheme funding eligible for regularization; whether funding source bars claim despite long service, regular pay parity and prior regularizations of similars.

Ratio Decidendi: Government notification created posts for skilled computer operators not fitting unskilled manual scheme object; prolonged contractual engagement despite perennial need and regular pay constitutes exploitation; state must act as model employer ensuring parity and fairness under Articles 14, 16. Result : Writ petitions allowed.

Table of Content
1. contractual computer operators granted regular pay scales. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. parity claimed with previously regularized employees. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. mgnrega funding cited against regularization by dop. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. long ad-hocism violates articles 14 and 16. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. mgnrega for unskilled work excludes skilled operators. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
6. model employer must end long-term contractual exploitation. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
7. regularization from regular pay scale date ordered. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37)

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in all the above captioned cases, and the petitioners herein are aggrieved by their non-regularization despite having completed requisite period as provided for regularization by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, this Court clubbed all the cases together for hearing, and now same are being disposed of vide this common judgment.

2. For having bird’s eye view, facts which are common in all the cases, are that vide notification dated 14.09.2007(Annexure P- 1), the Governor, Himachal Pradesh conveyed approval to fill up 77 posts of Computer Operators in Development Blocks (one in each Block), 12 in District Rural Development Agencies (one in each DRDA) and 3 at the Rural Development Department Headquarters with the prior concurrence of the Finance Department. The aforesaid notification further laid down the procedure for inviting applications as well as criteria for selection of incumbents as Computer Operators. Pursuant to afore notification, Department of Rural Development issued advertisement dated 28.09.2007 (Annexure P-2), thereby inviting applications for the post of Computer Operators. Petitioners herein, being fully eligible, applied for the post in question and subsequently on the basis of their overall merits, were offered appointment letters (one of the appointment letter is appended as Annexure P-3) on contract basis with fixed remuneration of Rs. 6,000/- per month, and contract was interse Government and the petitioner through the respondent-Department, which was renewed from time to time.

3. Though, initially, there were no Recruitment and Promotions Rules (for short ‘R&P Rules’) for the post of Computer Operator, but subsequently, the Governor of Himachal Pradesh, in the year 2012 vide notification dated 14.02.2012, notified common R&P Rules for the post of Computer Operators, named as Himachal Pradesh Department of Personnel Computer Operator Class-III, Non- Gazetted Common Director Recruitment & Promotion Rules, 2012 (Annexure P-5), wherein vide Clause 7, minimum educational and other qualifications came to be prescribed for direct recruitment. Clause 4 of the afore Rules provided for the pay scale of Computer Operators i.e. Regular incumbents were to be paid Rs. 10300- 34800+3200 Grade pay, whereas contractual employees were held entitled remuneration to the tune of Rs. 13,500/- per month. After promulgation of afore R&P Rules, respondent-Department converted the services of the petitioners to Government contract and as such, contracts were entered into between the Government and the petitioners through respondent No.2 (Annexure P-6).

4. In the year, 2012, State Government circulated a regularization policy vide communication dated 17.08.2012, conveying the decision of the State Government to regularize the services of contractual appointees on completion of six years’ service. Petitioners herein, who were engaged between the years 2006 and 2008, though had completed six years’ service in the year 2014, but they were not given benefit of aforesaid policy of regularization. In the year 2017, respondents, with the approval of His Excellency the Governor, Himachal Pradesh, granted the regular pay scale of Rs. 10300- 34800+3200 Grade alongwith other allowances to the contractual employees. As a result thereof, petitioners herein

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