Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
VIVEK JAIN
Dipendra Ku. Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. regularization request based on seniority. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. discrepancy in petitions based on prior labour court approach. (Para 3) |
ORDER :
VIVEK JAIN, J.
1. By way of present Petition, the Petitioners have sought the relief of regularization in service at par with the Private Respondents who are stated to be the juniors.
2. The case of the Petitioners is that the respondent/Municipal Corporation has framed a consolidated seniority list of Daily rated employees and in the said list, in Public Works Section, the names of Petitioners are at S.No.253, 113 and 249 whereas the names of Respondents No.4 and 5 are at S.No.260 and 261 despite which the respondents No.4 and 5 have been granted the benefit of regularization to the post of Time Keeper vide Order Annexure P-4 issued in the year 2022 whereas the Petitioners have been left out for such consideration.
3. The respondents have contested the said case of the Petitioners on the ground that the representation of the Petitioners has been turned down vide Order Annexure R-2 dated 19.01.2024 whereby it has been decided by the Corporation that the regularization shall be carried out only as per the seniority of the employees a
Employers must ensure parity among similarly situated employees regarding regularization, irrespective of prior court appeals.
Long-term employees cannot be denied regularization solely due to the absence of formal appointment documents; equitable treatment under Article 14 mandates similar consideration for all similarly si....
The court ruled that administrative decisions regarding employment regularization must avoid arbitrary discrimination and adhere to principles of equal treatment under the law.
Long-term service in irregular employment merits regularization despite procedural non-compliance, reaffirming equal treatment rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Employment rights must consider the evolution of employment circumstances, not just initial appointment terms; regularization claims post-superannuation lack merit without available positions.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that similarly situated employees are entitled to the regularization of their services, and adverse awards against them can be set aside to deem th....
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
