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

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 2123

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANANDA SEN, J.
Saryu Oraon, son of late Laate Oraon – Appellant 
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
WP(S) No.51 of 2025
Decided On : 17-11-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Rohit, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Manish Mishra

Long-serving employees must be granted retirement benefits despite lack of regularization, highlighting the obligation of employers to acknowledge years of service and fairness.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 - Writ jurisdiction - Service matters - Petitioner sought regularization of service after long tenure on daily wages, but was denied due to no available post and authority issues. Petitioner reached superannuation without regularization, court found refusal to grant benefits unjust. (Paras 3, 5, 7)

(B) Employment rights - The denial of retirement benefits to a long-serving employee is unreasonable, necessitating retrospective application of regularization principles to ensure fair treatment. (Paras 5, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was appointed on 01.10.1984 on daily wages to safeguard plantations but has not been regularized despite attaining superannuation age, with grounds for denial cited as lack of authority and available posts.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the petitioner, having served since 1984, must be afforded the benefits of regular employment, emphasizing the obligation of the employer to treat long-term workers fairly.

Issues: The court addressed whether the reasons for denying regularization were valid given the lengthy service and age of superannuation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the employer's grounds for refusing benefits after such a long period of service were insufficient, asserting that a model employer must recognize the rights of dedicated employees nearing retirement.

Result: Writ petition is allowed, impugned order set aside.

JUDGMENT :

SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed to quash the Order No. 11 dated 13.02.2024 passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, South Forest Division, Chatra.

3. The facts are admitted in this case. The petitioner was initially appointed on 01.10.1984 on daily wages. His duty was to safeguard the plantation in the scheme which was started by the State Government. Thereafter the petitioner was posted in different departments. He worked as Night Guard and in the office also. It is an admitted case that now he has reached the age of superannuation and has not been regularised.

4. The petitioner prayed for regularisation of his service which was kept pending and the respondents by the impugned order rejected the same on the ground that there is no post against which the petitioner can be regularised, further the petitioner was appointed by a person who did not have any authority to appoint.

5. The grounds taken by the respondents not to regularise the petitioner cannot be accepted at this stage when the petitioner has worked from 01.10.1984 and has attained the age of superannuation. If initially the respondents would have taken this plea, this Court could have given some indulgence, but not now. In this case where the petitioner has given his entire life and has reached the age of superannuation, the grounds taken by the respondents of not granting the benefits to the petitioner is not accepted by this Court. A person who has worked from 01.10.1984 and has attained the age of superannuation, must be provided with all the retiral benefits which a regular employee is entitled to.

6. Be it noted that as the petitioner’s services was not regularised he is deprived of all his benefits. As a model employer the respondents should grant the post retiral benefits to the petitioner.

7. Thus, I direct the respondents to pay all the post retiral benefits which a normal regular employee would have been paid on his superannuation.

8. For the purpose of making payment the respondents, if necessary, will create a supernumerary post and ensure that the petitioner receives the entire post retiral benefits.

9. Entire benefits should be disbursed within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

10. Impugned order no. 11 dated 13.02.2024 is set aside.

11. This writ petition is allowed.

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