Rajasthan High Court Directs State To Consider Regularising Employee After 28 Years Of Service, Says Ad-Hoc Appointment Can't Defeat Claim
Nupur Agrawal
16 April 2026 9:30 AM IST
Rajasthan High Court granted benefit to an employee who despite having rendered services for more than 28 years, was not being considered for regularization by the government on the ground that his initial appointment was not towards any sanctioned post, but on an ad-hoc basis.
The bench of Justice Anand Sharma observed that the State's plea of petitioner not being engaged on a sanctioned post but only for discharging overburden of work was already considered by the Labour Court, post which petitioner's termination on an earlier occasion was held to be illegal.
In this background, the Court held that the fact remained that the petitioner was still in employment for more than 2 decades, and was denied the right to be considered for regularization, which required Court's interference.
The petitioner was engaged as a daily wage employee in 1997 and his services were illegally terminated. The industrial dispute was settled by the Labour Court in favour of the petitioner which was unsuccessfully challenged by the government before the single bench, and thereafter the division bench of the Court.
Aggrieved by the orders of the Court, the government further challenged the orders before the Supreme Court and there also, the petition was dismissed. Thereafter the petitioner was reinstated.
The petition was filed by the petitioner contending that since the reinstatement, he was being paid meagre salary despite discharging the same duties which were being discharged by the regular employees. He was not being considered for regularization.
On the contrary, the government submitted that the petitioner was not engaged by any regular process of selection towards any sanctioned post. Rather, he was merely engaged to discharge overburden of work and therefore his services were tried to be terminated in 2001.
It was further argued that even though he was reinstated, such reinstatement was owing to the Court's orders which could not be treated as the petitioner being continued by the department on its own.
After hearing the contentions, the Court took into account petitioner's service of more than 28 years and still not being paid regular pay. It was held that the pleas raised by the government were already considered and still the termination was held to be illegal. Hence, the petitioner remained in employment and was entitled to be considered for regularization.
While making references of Supreme Court decisions on public employment, the Court directed the government to consider the petitioner for regularization, and if found suitable, grant the benefits of such regularization.
Accordingly, the petition was allowed.
Title: Shyam Lal v Senior Chemist, Public Health and Engineering Department & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 144