In a landmark ruling, the Rajasthan High Court granted relief to the home guard personnel of the State of Rajasthan, ending the rotational system of engagement that had limited their deployment period to 6-8 months without employment benefits. The bench, led by Justice Farjand Ali, observed that as a welfare state, Rajasthan should work towards the betterment of society, rather than exacerbating the plight of the poor. The court noted that the claim of home guards serving as "volunteers" was a facade, as the state not only deployed them on specific dates and occasions but also directed, instructed, and supervised their functions. In return, they received remuneration for their work, establishing an employer-employee relationship. The court emphasized that the treatment of these so-called "volunteers" was inequitable and fell below even the standards extended to contract or part-time employees in the private sector.
The court highlighted that the Rajasthan Home Guards Act, 1963, designates home guards as "volunteers," a term that implies willingness, absence of compulsion, and the freedom to withdraw at will. However, the court found that the reality was different, as home guards were compelled to serve under the directions of the state, with no freedom to withdraw. This situation led to the exploitation of home guards, who were made to serve for extended periods without job security or benefits.
The court's ruling mandated that all home guards be deployed on a continuous basis, directing the state to take necessary steps to implement this system to safeguard the interests of the home guards and ensure the effective functioning of the state machinery. This decision marked a significant shift in the treatment of home guards, recognizing their contributions and ensuring they receive the benefits and security they deserve.
In a related case, the Rajasthan High Court ruled that home guards who had been on non-rotational duty without any break could not be considered "volunteers." The extraordinary longevity of their service had transformed their role from voluntary to de facto employment with the state. The court observed that despite relying heavily on their services, the state had been exploiting them as cost-effective labor without offering commensurate protections, remunerations, job security, or post-retiral benefits. Such treatment was deemed unfair and unsustainable.
The court's decisions have brought attention to the plight of home guards in Rajasthan, highlighting the need for fair treatment and recognition of their services. By ending the rotational system and mandating continuous deployment with benefits, the court has paved the way for improved conditions for home guards, ensuring they are treated with the dignity and respect they deserve.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.