Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
B. Bharathamma – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
COMMON ORDER:
In view of commonality of the issue involved in both the writ petitions, they are analogously heard and taken up for disposal by way of this Common Order. For reference and discussion, the facts in W.P.No.20036 of 2013 are taken.
2. The case of the petitioners, precisely, as per the writ affidavit, is that they are educationally qualified and eligible for appointment as Anganwadi workers, and Supervisors Grade-II; and the respondent- Government has conducted due selection process, and selected the petitioners for appointment. However, due to the ban imposed at the relevant time for appointments, the petitioners were appointed on contract basis through an agency, namely RK4CES Agency, on contract basis. The material papers filed with the writ petition would show that one Indiramma was appointed way back in the year 1985; and the petitioners have put in service ranging between 6 to 15 years as on the date of filing the writ petition in 2013. While so, the respondent- Government issued a Notification No.228/2013 dated 02.07.2013 for recruitment of Supervisors Grade-II, by providing 15% weightage marks to the contract employees/petitioners. It is the grievance of the petiti
Long-serving contract employees with sanctioned appointments are entitled to regularization despite initial contractual terms, as established by judicial precedents.
Mere length of service does not vest an employee with a right to seek regularization, especially in the absence of any specific policy. The framing of a scheme for regularization is the prerogative o....
State cannot discriminate by granting contract appointments to successful litigants from same selection process while providing regular appointments to others, violating Article 14 equality.
The court ruled that long-serving contractual employees cannot be denied regularization based solely on contractual labels, emphasizing fair treatment under constitutional principles.
The regularization of long-serving contractual employees is mandated when their roles are inherently permanent, ensuring compliance with employment laws and protections against exploitation.
Employees appointed in temporary units on contractual basis are not entitled to absorption or regularization, as their initial appointment was not on permanent sanctioned posts.
Regularization of long-serving daily wage employees is mandated after 10 years of service, acknowledging functional continuity despite initial irregularities, violating constitutional rights otherwis....
Eligibility for regularization after six years of contract employment is upheld by relevant notifications and legal precedents.
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
