Summary
Employees engaged since1993 were denied regularisation and terminated after the High Court treated their appointments as illegal. Noting that they had received minimum-scale pay and retrospective temporary status, the Court found no backdoor entry and applied Umadevi’s one-time regularisation principle, directing regularisation and consequential benefits.
Issues
- Whether these long-serving employees’ appointments were illegal or irregular for the Umadevi exception.
- Whether the State’s no-posts argument was consistent with its own grant of temporary status.
- What effective date and monetary relief should follow.
Held
- Umadevi required fair regular recruitment and did not authorise continued exploitative contract or daily-wage employment as a device to deny proper employment benefits. Its one-time exception for qualifying irregular appointments had to be applied in its true spirit. (¶¶ 4, 8–10)
- The State’s grant of minimum-scale pay in2000 and temporary status in2006 showed work requirements and available posts, contradicting its assertion that no posts existed. The appointments were not backdoor entries; no relevant appointment rules were in place, and the Court treated them as falling within the one-time regularisation measure. This was a fact-specific application. (¶ 9–10)
- The operative direction fixed regularisation from2October2002 and required consequential benefits and pay arrears within three months. Both the adverse High Court judgment and termination order were quashed. (¶ 10–11)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment and termination order quashed. Services directed to be regularised from2October2002, with consequential benefits and pay arrears paid within three months; pending application disposed of.