Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
J. Abdul Malick – Appellant
Versus
Registrar-General, High Court Madras – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents to regularise the services of the writ petitioner in the post of Office Assistant in the Office of the third respondent based on G.O.Ms. No. 74, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 27.06.2013.
2. The writ petitioner was engaged as daily rated employee as Scavenger cum Sweeper. The order of appointment issued by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai dated 07.05.1990 reveals that he was appointed as daily wage employee on temporary basis and his services are liable to be terminated. Admittedly, the petitioner was not appointed in the sanctioned post.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recommendations were made by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court as well as by the High Court to the Government for sanctioning post or for conversion of post. Since the recommendations are not considered by the Government, the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 would oppose by stating that the petitioner was appointed as daily wage employee on temporary basis and he was not appoin
Regularisation of employment requires adherence to constitutional provisions and recruitment rules, specifically against sanctioned posts.
Regularization of employment requires adherence to constitutional provisions and recruitment rules, specifically against sanctioned posts, to prevent infringement of eligible candidates' rights.
Regular appointments should be made through open competitive processes against sanctioned vacant posts, and part-time temporary employees are not entitled to seek regularization or parity in pay with....
Daily wage employees cannot claim regularization unless appointed against sanctioned posts and in compliance with recruitment rules, as per constitutional mandates.
Regularization or permanent absorption cannot be granted in violation of recruitment rules, and appointments must comply with the constitutional scheme and relevant rules.
Appointments in public service must comply with constitutional mandates and recruitment rules; backdoor appointments cannot be regularized.
The court established that regularization of temporary employees must comply with constitutional mandates, ensuring equal opportunity and adherence to service rules.
Temporary or casual employment does not confer legal rights to regularization; adherence to proper recruitment processes is mandatory for permanent appointments.
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
