Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

“Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Rights of Long-Term Part-Time Employees, Directs Regularization and Compassionate Assistance

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


On 7 July 2023, In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has delivered a judgment affirming the eligibility of long-term part-time employees for regularization of their services and the entitlement to compassionate assistance. The judgment, delivered by Justice Raj Mohan Singh, emphasized that the availability of sanctioned posts should not be a valid ground to deny regularization when employees have diligently served for a substantial period.

Justice Raj Mohan Singh stated in the judgment, “Long-term part-time employees should be eligible for regularization of their services. The continuous nature of their work demonstrates the need for their regular presence, and it is unjust to deny them regularization based on the availability of sanctioned posts.” This decision aligns with previous court orders and government policies supporting the regularization of long-term part-time employees.

The case, Bimla and others v. State of Haryana and others, involved the petitioners seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to release service benefits, family pension, and financial assistance. The court recognized the entitlement of the deceased employee’s family to compassionate assistance, considering the deceased employee as a regular employee at the time of his death.

Justice Raj Mohan Singh further remarked, “The claim for compassionate assistance should be considered by the competent authority in accordance with the relevant laws and policies. The deceased employee’s family deserves the support provided under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependent of the Deceased Employee Rules 2006.”

This ruling has far-reaching implications, as it sets a precedent for the regularization and compassionate assistance for long-term part-time employees in the state. The judgment aligns with the principles of fairness and upholds the rights of employees who have dedicated their services to an establishment for an extended period.

The court’s decision in Bimla and others v. State of Haryana and others underscores the need for employers to recognize and acknowledge the contributions of long-term part-time employees. The ruling also highlights the importance of implementing policies that promote job security and address the concerns of such employees.

With this judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken a significant step towards ensuring equal treatment and justice for long-term part-time employees, enabling them to avail themselves of regularization and compassionate assistance in a fair and equitable manner.

Date of Decision: 07.07.2023

Bimla and others vs State of Haryana and others

Latest Legal News