The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has ruled that working in a department for over 20 years without a formal recruitment process does not grant an employee the right to regularization. The court emphasized that regularization can only happen if the due recruitment process is followed.
Case Details
The case involved a petitioner who was hired as a sweeper (Safai Karamchari) on a daily wage basis in the Department of Posts. He worked continuously for two decades without being granted regular employee status or receiving a minimum pay scale. Seeking justice, he first approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Chandigarh Bench, requesting equal pay with regular employees and the regularization of his service. However, CAT rejected his plea, stating that he was a daily wager and not entitled to regularization or equal pay.
Unhappy with this decision, he challenged the CAT order before the J&K High Court.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
A division bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta ruled that the petitioner’s appointment was not made through a formal recruitment process, making him ineligible for regularization. The court referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. Umadevi & Ors. (2006) 4 SCC 1, which states that employees hired without following a proper selection process cannot claim regularization.
However, the court also noted that since the petitioner had performed the same duties as regularly appointed Safai Karamcharis for over 20 years, he was entitled to receive equal pay for equal work. The judgment was based on the Supreme Court’s ruling in State of Punjab & Ors. v. Jagjit Singh & Ors. (2017), which stated that employees performing the same work as regular staff should receive the same wages.
Directions Given by the Court
- The petitioner must be paid the same salary as regular Safai Karamcharis from the date he filed his application before CAT, Chandigarh.
- The department must clear his pending arrears within two months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment.
Conclusion
While the High Court denied the petitioner’s request for regularization, it upheld his right to equal pay for equal work. This ruling reinforces the legal principle that government jobs must follow a formal recruitment process but also ensures fair wages for temporary employees performing the same duties as regular staff.
-
-
-
-
-
-
