Regularization of long-serving employees in irregular positions must be considered based on fairness and established legal principles.

1. The present OP(CAT) is preferred impugning the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.197/2023 dated 09/10/2023, whereby the following claim of the petitioner / applicant has been rejected by the Tribunal.

"i) To declare that the applicant is entitled to get regularization in service as Part Time Casual Labourers from their initial date of appointment with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary, extending the benefit of Annexure A2 and Annexure A3;

ii) To direct the respondents 1, 5 and 6 to pass orders regularizing the service of the applicant as Part Time Casual Labourers from his - initial date of appointment with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary extending the benefit of Annexures A2 and Annexure A3;

iii) To direct the respondents 1 to 7 to disburse the arrears of salary to the applicants in the scale of pay in par with regular Part Time Casual Labourers in the revised rate, immediately on regularizing the service of the applicant;

iv) To issue such other appropriate orders or directions that this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper in the circumstances of the case;

v) To grant the costs of this Original Application."

2. The petitioner / applicant, Sabu C., is a part time Casual Labourer, initially engaged on 06/10/1997. He has been continuing as a Casual Labourer for the past 25 years. The applicant placed reliance on Annexure - A2 order of the Madras High Court dated 20/09/2011, wherein, it was directed to frame a scheme for regularizing temporary status to the employees in the Central Excise Department. The case of the applicant was that, he ought to have been regularized with effect from the date of his first engagement. The petitioner / applicant has also referred a scheme of 1993, even though he was not a part time Casual Labourer during the currency of that scheme and also relied on Annexure - A4 scheme, framed by the Principal Chief Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, on the basis of which, services of the Part Time Casual Labourers were regularized.

3. Even though the petitioner / applicant submitted representations claiming the aforementioned relief, that was turned down by the respondents.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner / applicant approached the Tribunal and instituted OA No.443/2020. The said OA was disposed of as per Annexure - A6 order dated 13/01/2021 directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the application within a time frame. Even though the respondents had considered the claim for regularization but, petitioner / applicant was not regularized. The petitioner / applicant was also called for a personal hearing on 26/09/2022 but was not granted regularization.

5. The petitioner again approached the Tribunal seeking declaration that, he is entitled to be regularized in service as Part Time Casual Labourer from the date of appointment with all consequential benefits, including arrears of salary, extending the benefit of Annexures - A2 and A3.

6. The contention of the petitioner / applicant was that, even though he possesses all necessary qualifications required for regularization, for no fault of his, has been excluded from the list. His SSLC book went missing at the time of consideration of his regularization. Later, on 15/11/2021, obtained a duplicate copy of SSLC book (Annexure - A7). Annexure - A7 indicates that, he passed SSLC in March 1985. The delay in production of his SSLC book should not be taken as a ground for rejecting the claim for regularization.

7. The contention of the respondents before the Tribunal and before us is that, the applicant was engaged in 1997 on Adhoc basis. It is a Part Time job for