Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, Judicial Member, Pramod Kumar Das, Administrative Member
Chitrasen Mohanty – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's claim for retrospective regularization denied by respondents citing ineligibility. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties cite conflicting precedents on casual worker regularization. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. apex court critiques temporary employment exploitation for perennial roles. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. long continuous service mandates regularization distinguishing irregular appointments. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. directs retrospective regularization with compliance timeline. (Para 12 , 13) |
O R D E R
SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J):
1.Applicant has filed this OA inter alia praying for direction to the respondents to regularize his service by conferring temporary status retrospectively w.e.f. the date respondent Nos. 4 and 5 got temporary status with all consequential and monetary benefits.
2. In this case the respondents filed their counter, opposing and contesting the case of the applicant, by stating that the applicant was engaged in the year 1998 on casual basis, not against any sanctioned post. He was granted 1/30 pay scale on 27.04.2007 as per OM issued by the DoP&T. The Nodal Ministry i.e. DoPT issued OM dated 10.09.1993, providing therein the conditions for conferment of tempo
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
