Casual Labourers Have Intermittent And Sporadic Employment Whereas Daily Wagers Render Continuous Service: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
A single judge bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court comprising of Justice Sanjeev Kumar while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Ghar Singh vs University of Jammu & Ors has held that a Casual Labourer is labour whose employment is intermittent and sporadic, where as a Daily Wager renders continuous service and is paid on a daily basis.Background FactsGhar Singh...
A single judge bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court comprising of Justice Sanjeev Kumar while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Ghar Singh vs University of Jammu & Ors has held that a Casual Labourer is labour whose employment is intermittent and sporadic, where as a Daily Wager renders continuous service and is paid on a daily basis.
Background Facts
Ghar Singh (Petitioner) was engaged as a casual labourer and was posted as a security guard at the University of Jammu (Respondent) in 1997. The services of the Petitioner as a security guard were regularized by an order dated 25.03.2010. However, the Petitioner made a representation against the prospective regularization of his service as he was entitled to be regularized in terms of SRO 64 of 1994 immediately on the completion of 7 years of continuous service. The representation of the Petitioner was not considered by the Vice Chancellor and thus the Petitioner filed the aforesaid Civil Writ Petition.
It was contended by the Respondent that since the Petitioner was not a daily wagerer but a casual labourer, he was not covered by SRO 64 of 1994. His regularization was made by the Respondent as a policy decision to regularize the daily wagers/casual labourers, who had been working for a long time.
Findings of the Court
The court observed that the petitioner completed his 7 years of continuous service in 2004 and was eligible for regularization from 01.04.2005. Further the University of Jammu had not framed any policy for regularization of daily workers and had rather adopted the policy of Government of Jammu & Kashmir promulgated by SRO 64 of 1994.
The court further observed that the fact that the Petitioner was regularized after 12 years of service cannot be ignored. When a petty daily worker is pitted against a University, which is a mighty statutory body, then it is the University which has all the bargaining power. In such a situation, the daily wagerer does not have any option but to accept the terms and conditions of employment dictated by his employer.
The court further remarked that the retrospective regularization of the Petitioner would not adversely affect the rights of any employees of the university as the Petitioner has retired. The court further observed that a Security guard who had been rendering continuous services since 1997 cannot be termed as a “casual labourer”. The court elaborated that:
“Casual Labour‟ refers to labour whose employment is intermittent, sporadic or extends over short period or continued from one work to another, whereas a “daily rated worker‟ or “daily wager‟ is a person, who is engaged for rendering continuous nature of service and is paid wages on daily basis”
The court thus remarked that a person engaged temporarily who has been paid wages at rates sanctioned by the government and who has continued his duties for more than 7 years cannot be termed as “casual labourer” to deny him the benefit of regularization under SRO 64 of 1994.
With the aforesaid observations, the Civil Writ Petition was allowed.
Case No.- SWP No.1611/2016
Case Title: Ghar Singh vs University of Jammu & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 75
Counsel for the Petitioner- Mr. Gourav Goswami
Counsel for Respondent- Mr. Ajay Abrol