Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Narula, J
Kinshuk Mahanty – Appellant
Versus
Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the background facts regarding recruitment of contractual field executives versus regular graduate trainees. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments comparing the nature of contractual service with regular service and invoking the doctrine of equal pay for equal work. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. legal analysis on the limitations of judicial power in ordering regularisation and the requirements for establishing pay parity. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. conclusion that no legal right to regularisation exists and the writ petition is dismissed. (Para 11 , 12) |
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeks, in substance, two sets of directions: first, a mandamus to regularise or absorb the Petitioners, who were engaged as fixed tenure Field Executives pursuant to Advertisement No. 3/2008 (R&P); and second, a mandamus directing parity in salary, promotional avenues and allied service benefits with regular executives of the Respondent Corporation, particularly Graduate Trainees (E-1 level) recruited in the same period.
2. The relevant facts are largely undisputed. In 2008, the Respondent issued an advertisement for recruitment of 250 fixed tenure Field Executives. The e
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
