State can't adopt artificial classifications to deny benefits of regularisation: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said the State, as a model employer, cannot adopt artificial classifications to deny statutory benefits. It emphasised repackaging contractual engagements under a different nomenclature, while denying regularization, violates the equality mandate under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta declared that Section 3(b) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010, insofar as it excluded employees appointed on an academic arrangement basis from consideration for regularisation despite fulfilment of conditions under Section 5 of the Act, is unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Expressing serious disapproval of the manner in which a group of contractual employees were denied regularisation in Jammu and Kashmir, the bench said the State is expected to act as a model employer and not as a hard-bargaining or avaricious negotiator.

Where employees appointed on an “academic arrangement” basis are similarly situated to those engaged on ad hoc, contractual or consolidated basis in terms of duties, tenure, conditions of service and mode of appointment, denial of equal treatment solely on the basis of nomenclature is impermissible under Article 14 of the Constitution, the bench said.

The appellants, appointed to the posts of Junior Staff Nurse/Female Multipurpose Health Worker during the period between 2011 and 2013, sought regularisation of their services. However, an advertisement was issued in September, 2015, inviting applications for appointment on a regular basis to 1088 posts, which included the posts occupied by the present appellants.

They filed writ petitions seeking the benefit of regularisation under the 2010 Act. The single judge, by a common judgment of May 4, 2018, dismissed the writ petitions and declined the appellants’ claim for regularisation in terms of the said Act. The division bench also dismissed intra court appeals.

In 2010, the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Special Provisions) Act, 2010 was enacted providing for the regularisation of employees appointed on an ad hoc, contractual or consolidated basis. But, the appointments made under the 2009 order were expressly excluded from the categories eligible to seek regularisation of service under the said enactment.

Emphasizing that any artificial or unreasonable classification would strike at the very core of the right to equality and violate the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution, the bench said, the very object underlying the enactment of the 2010 Act was to cure and regularise long-standing irregular appointments and to extend legal protection to employees who had been rendering service for prolonged periods against substantive and essential posts.

The Act, therefore, cannot be construed or applied in a manner that arbitrarily excludes a class of employees, such as the present appellants, who are discharging identical duties under comparable conditions, the bench held.

The court ordered for regularisation of the appellants within four weeks, clarifying that this judgment would extend to all similarly situated employees.