'Institutional Exploitation': High Court Raps Haryana Govt For Not Regularising Sweepers For Decades, Says They Keep Society In Order
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has strongly deprecated the Haryana Government's continued failure to regularise the services of a part-time sweeper who has been working continuously since 1986, observing that extracting labour for nearly four decades while denying security of service strikes at the heart of fairness, equity and social justice and they perform functions that are vital for orderly functioning of society.
Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "This Court cannot remain untroubled by a situation where a workman, nominally designated as a Class-IV employee, has in reality been performing functions that are vital to the day-to-day operations of the establishment and, in a broader sense, essential to the orderly functioning of society itself. To disregard the contribution of the petitioner is to overlook the foundational labour that sustains public institutions."
Hearing the petition filed by a sweeper working as part-time since 1986 seeking regularisation of his service, the Court noted that the petitioner had devoted the better part of his life to the respondent establishment, performing duties that were not casual or intermittent, but perennial and indispensable to the day-to-day functioning of the institution.
The Court recorded that his service remained unblemished throughout and that his labour had been utilised by the State well beyond the prime of his life.
"The petitioner has, quite literally, spent his productive years in the service of the State, crossing the prime of his life while serving the respondents with unwavering sincerity," it added.
Justice Moudgil observed that, "the continued denial of regularization after extracting his labour for almost forty years strikes at the very heart of fairness, equity, and social justice. Such conduct on the part of the State amounts to nothing short of institutional exploitation, wholly incompatible with the constitutional mandate enshrined under Articles 14, 16, and 19 of the Constitution of India."
The judge remarked that, "The State, which is expected to act as a model employer, cannot be permitted to benefit from the labour of a workman for decades and thereafter disclaim responsibility under the guise of technical classifications."
The Bench further underscored that the Constitution of India does not merely guarantee formal equality but envisages a humane and socialist State committed to dignity, livelihood and justice for the weakest sections of society. It cautioned that the Preamble's promise of a “socialist” republic would be rendered hollow if workers at the lowest rungs of administration are denied security and recognition even after a lifetime of service.
Describing the conduct of the respondents as not only legally untenable but “morally indefensible”, the Court said that such treatment reflects a disturbing departure from the constitutional vision of social justice and undermines the ideals of dignity of labour and substantive equality cherished by the framers of the Constitution. The Court recorded that its conscience was “deeply shaken” by the manner in which the petitioner had been treated despite his lifelong dedication to public service.
Directing state to file reply, the matter has been adjourned to 31 January 2026.
Mr. Deepak Sonak, Advocate for the petitioner(s)
Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. AG. Haryana