No prohibition in giving weightage to service rendered by daily wages employees: SC clarifies Uma Devi’s Judgment [Read Judgment]

No prohibition in giving weightage to service rendered by daily wages employees: SC clarifies Uma Devi’s Judgment [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court of India has clarified that, its Judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi  has not prohibited the State from giving weightage for the service rendered by employees where services were used by the State either temporarily or on adhoc bases, including daily wage basis, irrespective of the regularity of their initial entry into the service. Apex Court bench comprising of Justices J. Chelameswar and Abhay Manohar Sapre made this pertinent observation in Sachivalaya Dainik Vetan Bhogi Karamchari Union, Jaipur VS. State Of Rajasthan.

BACKGROUND FACTS



  • The Employee Union’s Writ petition (1999) before Division Bench of Rajasthan HC was disposed of recording the settlement between the Union and State. The crux of the settlement was that In the event of the Government making regular selections for the vacant posts , the petitioners shall be given weightage as well as relaxation in the eligibility condition keeping in view their long duration of past services.

  • In 2011, State issued an advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment to 289 posts of 'Class IV employees providing some weightage in favour of the members of the Union and other similarly situated people.

  • In 2014, the Employees Union filed another petition before the High Court seeking a direction to the State to declare the result of Class-IV employees and give appointment to the members of the petitioner Union who are continuously discharging their duties as class IV employees from last 15-20 years on daily wages basis. This Writ petition was allowed by the Single Bench by directing the State to declare the result of the recruitment process in issue after giving appropriate bonus marks to the members of the union and give appointment orders to the selected candidates.

  • The State preferred appeal before the Division Bench, which set aside the order by Single bench relying on dictum laid down in Uma Devi’s case and observed that the settlement could not enforced.

  • The employee Union preferred SLP before the Apex Court.


NO PROHIBITION IN GIVING WEIGHTAGE TO SERVICE RENDERED BY TEMPORARY/DAILY WAGES EMPLOYEES

Explaining the dictum laid down in Uma Devi’s case, the Court observed: “Inspite of a pointed question, the learned counsel for the first respondent could not point out anything in Uma Devi's judgment which either dealt with or prohibited the State from giving weightage for the service rendered by employees where services were used by the State either temporarily or on adhoc bases (including daily wage basis) irrespective of the regularity of their initial entry into the service. All that this Court declared in Uma Devis' case is that such people cannot claim to be appointed automatically on the ground that their services were utilised on temporary basis for considerably long periods.”

Setting aside the Division Bench Judgment, the Court held: “We are of the opinion that the Division Bench was in error in coming to the conclusion that in view of Uma Devi's judgment, the settlement recorded by the High Court in its order dated 28.1.2003 become unenforceable. We do not see any basis in law for such a conclusion. Uma Devi (supra) only dealt with in relation to the execution and regularisation of temporary and adhoc service without any reference to any law. Uma Devi never dealt with a validity of the judicial order which had attained finality.”

The Court allowing the appeal, also held that members of the Employees Union are also entitled for some weightage for the past service rendered by them.

Read the Judgment here.