Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Pandit Sandu Jadhav, was appointed as a Muster Assistant on a seasonal basis by the Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad, on 29 April 1987. His appointment was initially for three months on a monthly salary of Rs. 400, and it was renewed year after year. He worked continuously until 2009, when his services were terminated. During his service, he completed a one-year certificate course in Construction Supervisor and passed the examination in April 2004. He filed a complaint before the Industrial Court at Aurangabad (Complaint ULP No. 69/2009) challenging his termination. The Industrial Court dismissed his complaint on 23 September 2011. Aggrieved, he filed the present writ petition in 2011. The High Court noted that the petitioner had worked for 22 years with artificial breaks and that his termination was without any notice or opportunity of hearing. The court observed that the Industrial Court had erred in dismissing his complaint. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation and retired on 30 April 2020. He was granted only provisional pension and was deprived of regular pension and post-retiral benefits. The High Court held that the petitioner's service was continuous and that he was entitled to regularization. The court set aside the Industrial Court's order and directed the respondents to treat the petitioner's service as continuous, grant him regular pension and all post-retiral benefits, and pay arrears within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination - Muster Assistant - Continuous Service - The petitioner was appointed as a seasonal Muster Assistant from 1987 and worked continuously with artificial breaks until 2009. His termination without notice or opportunity of hearing was held illegal. The court directed his reinstatement with continuity of service and all consequential benefits, including regular pension and retiral benefits. (Paras 1-10) B) Service Law - Regularization - Muster Assistant - The petitioner's appointment was initially seasonal but continued year after year for 22 years. The court held that such long continuous service, coupled with his acquisition of a Construction Supervisor certificate, entitled him to regularization. The respondents were directed to treat his service as continuous and grant him regular pension and post-retiral benefits. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the petitioner, who worked as a Muster Assistant for 22 years with artificial breaks, was illegal and whether he is entitled to regularization and retiral benefits.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Industrial Court's order dated 23/09/2011, and directed the respondents to treat the petitioner's service as continuous, grant him regular pension and all post-retiral benefits, and pay arrears within three months.
Law Points
- Continuous service
- regularization
- termination without notice
- natural justice
- retiral benefits
- pension
