Jaggo vs. Union of India & Ors.
Background
The appellants had worked for years as contractual/casual employees under a central government establishment but were denied regularisation of service. The Central Administrative Tribunal and later the Delhi High Court had both rejected their claim for regularisation, effectively allowing their services to be terminated. Two connected appeals (originally five applicants before the Tribunal, four of whom pursued the matter to the Supreme Court) challenged this outcome, arguing they had rendered years of continuous service and were unfairly denied permanency and its associated benefits.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, quashed the termination orders, and directed that the appellants be reinstated and their services regularised. It held that treating long-serving employees as disposable contractual labour, only to terminate them to avoid regularisation obligations, amounted to an unfair labour practice inconsistent with principles of job security and fairness that government institutions, as model employers, are expected to uphold. However, the Court balanced this by denying back wages for the period the appellants did not actually work, while granting them continuity of service (counted for post-retirement benefits) for that period. The Court emphasized that reducing unnecessary litigation and promoting fair labour practices in government service also sets a positive example for the private sector.
Lesson Learnt
Government departments cannot indefinitely keep employees on contractual or casual status to avoid the legal consequences of regularisation: long, continuous service can entitle a worker to reinstatement and regularisation, though courts may still deny back wages for time not actually worked while protecting continuity of service for retirement benefits.