Continuous Service Warrants Regularization: Bombay High Court Affirms in Tax Inspector Case

High Court dismisses petition against Industrial Court’s directive, emphasizing the equity and procedural compliance in regularizing temporary employee.

The Bombay High Court, led by Justice Sandeep V. Marne, has upheld an Industrial Court order mandating the regularization of a temporary employee, Shekhar B. Abhang, to the position of Tax Inspector at the Pen Municipal Council. The decision, delivered on May 6, 2024, emphasized the legitimacy of the respondent’s prolonged service and the procedural adherence in his appointment, despite objections regarding qualifications and the selection process.

The court underscored that the respondent’s initial appointment, though labeled temporary, bore the hallmarks of a regular appointment. Justice Marne noted, “The appointment of Respondent No.1 had all trappings of a regular appointment. Though the Respondent No.1 was virtually appointed on a regular basis, his tenure was restricted to six months, possibly due to baseless apprehension expressed by the General Body of the Municipal Council that the post would lapse if not filled within six months.”

Justice Marne elaborated on the procedural adherence followed in Abhang’s appointment. The post of Tax Inspector was sanctioned, and all senior eligible employees had given their no objection for filling the post through direct recruitment. The court observed that the respondent’s name was sponsored by the Employment Exchange, and he underwent a selection process involving an interview conducted by the District Employment Officer.

The High Court dismissed the petitioners’ claims that Abhang was unqualified and that the appointment bypassed other eligible senior clerks. Justice Marne pointed out that these objections were contradicted by evidence, including a justification letter from the Regional Director, Municipal Administration, which validated the respondent’s appointment.

The judgment extensively referenced key legal precedents, including the landmark case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Umadevi & Ors. (2006), emphasizing the principles of regularization in public employment. The court highlighted that while Umadevi cautioned against regularization of temporary employees, it also carved out exceptions for those serving in sanctioned posts for extended periods without judicial intervention.

Justice Marne remarked, “Denying the relief of regularization to Respondent No.1 would be against the principles of equity and fairness. His continuous service akin to permanent employees runs counter to the principles of equity, fairness, and the intent behind employment regulations.”

The High Court’s ruling reaffirms the Industrial Court’s authority to regularize employees who have been victims of unfair labor practices and have demonstrated prolonged and legitimate service. This judgment not only strengthens the position of employees in similar circumstances but also reinforces the statutory powers of industrial adjudicators to ensure fair employment practices.

Date of Decision: May 6, 2024

The Chief Officer, Pen Municipal Council, Pen, District Raigad & Anr. Vs. Shekhar B. Abhang & Anr.