Karnataka High Court orders regularisation of service of 68-year-old man, who had retired in 2015 after serving as daily wage employee for 21 years

The High Court of Karnataka has ordered regularisation of work of a 68-year-old man, who retired 10 years agone pending his plea for regularisation of work astatine a gram panchayat successful Sirsi taluk of Uttara Kannada district, aft serving arsenic an attender-cum-bill collector connected declaration ground for 21 years since 1994.

“The close to information for work does not evaporate connected attainment of property of superannuation arsenic the petitioner retired arsenic regular wage declaration worker portion his assertion for regularisation subsisted,” the tribunal said.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the bid portion allowing a petition filed by Venkatarama Hegde, nonmigratory of Kuluve colony successful Sirsi taluk.

The work of the petitioner should basal regularised with effect from the day connected which helium had completed 10 years successful work from the day of archetypal assignment connected declaration ground that is connected January 9, 2004, the tribunal said.

The petitioner was not regularised successful work contempt the proposal made by the gram panchayat and a absorption issued by the tribunal successful 2014.

Apex Court’s rulings

Citing the Supreme Court’s large judgments, close from the 2006 lawsuit of State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi and Dharam Singh vs. State of UP, 2015, connected regularisation of service, the High Court said that the “employees careless of the nomenclature attached to their engagement, whether temporary, contractual oregon regular wage oregon adjacent connected consolidated pay, erstwhile they person completed 10 years of work and were different qualified to clasp the post, are entitled to information for regularization.”

The tribunal besides said that but wage arrears, the petitioner would beryllium entitled to each benefits taking the full service, betwixt 1994 and 2015, erstwhile helium retired, arsenic work for the intent of specified determination, including for each status benefits.

Cautioned

Meanwhile, the tribunal cautioned the State authorities that they should not thrust the petitioner into yet different rhythm of litigation by resurrecting the SC’s judgement successful Umadevi’s lawsuit to contradict regularisation, arsenic the authorities had claimed that the petitioner does not acceptable into the conditions stipulated successful Umadevi’s case.

The SC, successful judgments consequent to Umadevi’s case, connected regularisation of services had made it wide that definite regularisation for regularisation mentioned successful Umadevi’s lawsuit “cannot beryllium deployed arsenic a shield to perpetuate injustice oregon to contradict morganatic regularisation to employees who person served State for decades”, the High Court made it clear.