Supreme Court Delivers Justice to ISRO's Forgotten Ground Force: Regularisation Ordered After 30-Year Fight

In a landmark ruling on April 29, 2026, the Supreme Court of India, through a bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta , has directed the regularization of daily-wage "gang labourers" at ISRO's Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre (LPSC) in Mahendragiri. Dismissing the Madras High Court's earlier refusal, the Court quashed key parts of the Union's 2012 "Gang Labourers Scheme" for failing to honor a decade-old Tribunal mandate. This verdict not only secures permanent status for the appellants—led by R. Iyyappan—but extends benefits to all similarly placed workers, reinforcing the State's obligation as a "model employer."

The Unsung Backbone of India's Space Odyssey

The saga began in the early 1990s when the appellants were hired as daily-wage gang labourers between 1991 and 1997 at LPSC, a high-security ISRO unit declared a prohibited area under the Official Secrets Act. Tasked with "sporadic" duties like loading, unloading, and shifting materials—essential for rocket assembly and testing—they toiled for 14-26 years without formal posts or security.

In 2009, they approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Madras Bench. On March 9, 2010, CAT ruled that while no automatic regularization existed due to the ad-hoc nature, continuous engagement proved recurring needs. It directed the Union to "formulate a scheme or issue ad-hoc rules by creating the required number of posts" for permanent engagement within six months (by September 9, 2010), prioritizing these experienced workers with age relaxations.

The Union challenged this, but the Madras High Court upheld it in 2011, and the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP in July 2011—attaining finality. Yet, instead of posts, the Union rolled out the 2012 Scheme in September, offering only temporary engagement till age 60 on daily wages, without permanence.

Multiple rounds of litigation followed: CAT rejected challenges in 2016 and 2018; a 2017 High Court remand led nowhere. The 2024 High Court dismissal, citing State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006), prompted this SLP.

Appellants' Plea: Honor the Final Verdict

The workers, represented effectively, argued the 2010 CAT order—finalized up to the Supreme Court—mandated permanent engagement via created posts with retrospective benefits. Prolonged daily-wage toil for perennial tasks violated Article 23 (forced labour) and Article 14 (equality), turning them into exploited outliers in a sensitive national asset.

Union's Defense: No Posts, No Promises

The Additional Solicitor General countered that duties were purely sporadic, with no employer-employee tie or sanctioned posts. The 2012 Scheme complied by ensuring engagement till 60, plus preferential future vacancies—no regularization right existed per Umadevi , as initial hires bypassed recruitment rules.

Court's Razor-Sharp Scrutiny: Finality Over Fresh Rehash

The Supreme Court zeroed in on the 2010 CAT order's true import: not vague regularization, but a "structured regime" with sanctioned posts for permanent footing, balancing security and fairness. The 2012 Scheme's temporary clauses (e.g., Clause 4) blatantly deviated, diluting the mandate.

Dismissing the High Court's Umadevi reliance, the bench held it "wholly impermissible" to reopen merits post-finality. Subsequent inquiries were limited to compliance checks . Quoting the judgment: "Any scheme that falls short of this requirement, by merely regulating engagement without providing for such post creation, cannot be said to be in compliance with the letter and spirit of the said directions."

The Court lambasted the Union for protracted delays, forcing marginalized workers into endless courts, flouting Article 14's anti-arbitrariness core.

Echoes from ISRO's Humble Roots: Pivotal Quotes

The judgment's eloquence shone in recognizing support staff:

"In celebrating the glory of our scientific fraternity, we must not overlook the invisible yet indispensable contributions of every individual... The last man standing in this chain... performs duties that may appear sporadic... without their dedicated support, the very materials... would falter."

On state duty:

"The obligation of the State to act as a model employer... flows directly from... Article 14... strikes at arbitrariness and mandates fairness."

And finality:

"Once judicial directions attain finality, the authorities cannot dilute their substance by framing schemes that fall short of compliance."

As reported in 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 441 , these observations underscore broader systemic fairness.

Permanent Liftoff: Relief and Ripple Effects

The appeal succeeds: The 2012 Scheme (inconsistent parts) and Madras High Court order stand set aside. The Union must regularize appellants' services with permanent status from September 9, 2010 , within four weeks. Benefits extend to all under the Scheme.

This ruling fortifies judicial finality in service matters, compels post-creation for long-term casuals in strategic units, and elevates "model employer" from rhetoric to reality. For ISRO's ground crew—who mirrored early missions' bullock-cart ingenuity—it's dignified closure after decades.