The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark judgment, emphasized that any policy decision regarding the regularisation of employees must be uniformly applied to all eligible individuals. This ruling came while upholding the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order to regularize the appointment of a daily wage worker, Shyam Kumar Yadav, employed at Government Kalaniketan Polytechnic College, Jabalpur.
Background of the Case
Shyam Kumar Yadav, engaged initially as a daily-rated employee on November 26, 1993, had his services terminated on May 12, 1995. Following a recommendation by the Screening Committee, he was reinstated, with discrepancies in records showing reinstatement occurring either in 2006 or 2009. Despite his long service, Yadav's regularisation was overlooked while his juniors were regularised, prompting him to seek legal recourse multiple times.
Legal Arguments and High Court Rulings
The Madhya Pradesh High Court noted Yadav's continuous service and his eligibility for regularisation based on the government policy and constitutional provisions of equality under Articles 14 and 16. The court identified a case of hostile discrimination against Yadav, as recommended by the Screening Committee but not implemented by the State. The High Court ruled in favor of Yadav, ordering his regularisation and this decision was upheld by a Division Bench of the High Court in 2018. The State of Madhya Pradesh subsequently challenged this decision in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court's Observations
A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed that while daily wage employees do not have an inherent right to seek regularisation, any policy decision made must be applied equally to all eligible individuals. The Supreme Court criticized the State's vague and evasive affidavits and documents, highlighting Yadav's uninterrupted service and conformity with constitutional provisions as justifications for his regularisation.
The Court underscored that the authorities cannot arbitrarily pick and choose beneficiaries of a regularisation policy. Yadav's case, involving repeated court visits and clear eligibility, was deemed a straightforward instance of unjust discrimination.
Implications of the Judgment
The Supreme Court’s ruling reinforces the principle of equality and non-arbitrariness in administrative actions. It mandates that all eligible employees must be treated uniformly under any regularisation policy, preventing authorities from discriminatory practices. The decision upholds the right of employees to be treated fairly and in accordance with established policies, ensuring that long-serving daily wage workers receive their due benefits.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition by the State of Madhya Pradesh, directing the State to grant Shyam Kumar Yadav all the benefits of regular employment, including arrears of pay and seniority, within three months. This judgment not only provides justice to Yadav but also sets a precedent for the equal and fair application of regularisation policies across India, reinforcing the principles of equality and fairness enshrined in the Constitution.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.