Rakesh Kumar Charmakar v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Background
The appellants were appointed as "part-time Swachchkar" (sweepers) in Madhya Pradesh's Veterinary Department under a Special Recruitment Drive for reserved-category candidates, at wages fixed by the Collector. They claimed entitlement to a regular pay-scale after three years of service under a 1984 government circular, relying on an earlier case (Ram Naresh Prajapati) where similarly-placed employees had won this benefit. The Madhya Pradesh High Court's Division Bench denied them the benefit, distinguishing their case on the ground that, unlike the earlier case, they had not later been "upgraded" to specifically named sanctioned posts.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the appellants had, in fact, been appointed against sanctioned and vacant posts (not merely engaged for casual work) through a valid Selection Committee process under the Special Recruitment Drive, and that the "part-time" label in their designation did not change the substance of their appointment. It found the distinction drawn by the High Court, the absence of a later "upgrade" through a Screening Committee, was not a sufficient factual difference to treat them differently from the earlier successful claimants, especially since the State had never even constituted such a committee for them. The Court also noted a 2016 circular independently extending regular pay-scale benefits to long-serving daily-wage employees, which covered the appellants regardless. It restored the Single Judge's order granting them regular pay-scale with arrears.
Lesson Learnt
The substance of how a government employee was actually appointed and where they work matters more than a job title like "part-time". If the appointment was against a real sanctioned post through a valid selection process, the government cannot deny long-serving employees the same pay-scale benefits given to similarly situated colleagues merely by pointing to a label or a missing paperwork step within its own control.