Union of India & Ors. v. All India Trade Union Congress & Ors.
Background
Trade unions representing casual workers employed by the Border Roads Organisation (BRO) on a Char Dham Yatra road project in Uttarakhand sought regularisation of these long-serving casual labourers as government employees. A single judge of the Uttarakhand High Court allowed their writ petition directing regularisation, and the Division Bench not only upheld this but went further, itself framing a detailed welfare scheme, covering pay scale, housing, warm clothing, creches, medical treatment and more, and directing the Union of India to implement it. The Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the case was squarely governed by its own earlier decision in Union of India vs. Vartak Labour Union, involving nearly identical facts (casual BRO workers elsewhere seeking regularisation), where it had ruled that long service alone does not entitle casual workers to regularisation if their original appointment did not follow due process, and that courts should at most direct the government to consider framing a scheme, not draft one themselves. The Court held the High Court had exceeded its proper role under Article 226 by itself devising and imposing a detailed welfare scheme, which is the Executive's prerogative, not the judiciary's. Noting that the Union of India had in fact already framed its own welfare scheme for such workers, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and dismissed the original writ petition.
Lesson Learnt
Courts exercising writ jurisdiction can direct the government to consider framing welfare measures for long-serving casual workers, but cannot draft and impose a specific scheme themselves: that remains the government's own policy-making prerogative.