Back
Mysore Medical College Must Pay Regular Wages to Long-Serving :
A Division Bench of the has upheld the right of “” who had been performing full-time staff nurse duties for years to receive regular wages and until a is undertaken. The court dismissed appeals by the and the , finding that the label “stipendiary” was a used to exploit the nurses on a long-term contractual basis.
A Misleading Label: ‘Stipendiary’ or Exploitative Contract?
The dispute began when a group of nurses holding diplomas in General Nursing and Midwifery (GNM), engaged by the from onwards, approached the High Court. They argued that despite being designated as “” meant for short-term training, they were in fact performing the same duties as regular staff nurses year after year. Many had worked continuously for over five years. In , a learned Single Judge allowed their writ petitions, directing the college to pay them wages as per a Government Order dated , which mandated equal wages for contract employees in autonomous institutions, and ordered that they not be replaced by fresh contract hires. The college and the state appealed.
Arguments: Training vs. Permanent Need
The appellant college contended that the nurses were merely trainees engaged for six-month stipendiary periods and that the Government Order of 2019 applied only to contractual employees, not . It pointed to a later Government Order dated , which fixed a stipend of Rs. 12,445 per month (later raised to Rs. 15,556). The college argued that were not entitled to regular pay scales or even minimum wages, and that their services could be dispensed with after training.
On the other hand, the respondent nurses submitted that the college had failed to file any objections before the Single Judge and that the documents on record – including appointment orders and experience certificates spanning years – proved they were not short-term trainees but . They argued that the Single Judge had correctly found the “stipendiary” label to be a facade for long-term exploitation.
Court’s Analysis:
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice T.P.Vivekananda, closely examined the evidence and agreed with the Single Judge’s factual findings. The court observed:
“The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the nomenclature of ‘’ given to the writ petitioners was misleading and that what was actually done was an exploitation of their services for long years on a contract basis or on a temporary basis.”
The Bench noted that the nurses were fully qualified, had been engaged continuously for years, and were performing the same duties as regular staff nurses essential for the hospital’s functioning. The court rejected the argument that the 2019 Government Order did not apply, holding:
“It was found by the learned Single Judge that since the services of the writ petitioners was also being utilised full time, they were also entitled to payment of wages as provided in the Government Order dated 26.02.2019, even if they are called .”
The court relied on the ’s ruling in , which established that temporary or contract employees cannot be denied . It also referred to and to affirm that such employees are entitled to until regular appointments are made.
Key Observations
The Bench made several pointed observations about the nature of the engagement:
“We have considered the contentions advanced on all sides, we are of the opinion that the essential directions issued by the learned Single Judge do not require any interference.”
However, the court clarified that its order would not prevent the hospital from engaging genuine short-term stipendiary trainees. It stated:
“The Hospital would be free to make appointments of for the limited period of their training, in case such appointments are required to be made and the directions issued by the learned Single Judge will not stand in the way of such short stipendiary engagements being made as trainees in the Hospital.”
Final Decision and Implications
The Division Bench dismissed the appeals with modifications. It upheld the Single Judge’s directions that the existing nurses must and receive wages as per the 2019 Government Order. Crucially, the court directed the college to initiate a for staff nurses at the earliest, and to consider the present nurses for those posts with the benefit of for the years they have served.
This ruling sends a strong signal to autonomous medical institutions that long-term engagement of workers under the guise of “stipendiary” or “training” positions will not be tolerated. The decision reinforces the constitutional principle of and provides a pathway for temporary workers to secure permanent employment through regular recruitment processes.
