Case Note & Summary
The writ petitions were filed by ten Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) working at the Jayadev Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research since their appointments between 2004 and 2007. They challenged an endorsement dated 02.06.2023 by which the Institute denied their request for regularization of service, and also challenged transfer orders dated 08.06.2023. The petitioners contended that they had been continuously discharging the same duties as regular Staff Nurses for nearly two decades, yet they were paid a lesser stipend and denied benefits, in violation of the constitutional principle of equal pay for equal work under Article 14. They further argued that the Institute had previously regularized similarly placed Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) after five years of service, and that their appointments were against sanctioned posts approved by the government from time to time. The Institute, while not disputing the length of service, maintained that the appointments were purely contractual, for a fixed tenure of two years, renewable every six months with a break, and were not made against any sanctioned permanent posts. It relied on the Constitution Bench decision in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3) to argue that regularization cannot be claimed by those not appointed through a regular recruitment process against permanent posts. The court, after hearing arguments, reserved judgment on 26.06.2024 and pronounced this order on 25.09.2024, framing the sole issue as to whether the appointments were regular and whether the petitioners could be regularized after two decades of service.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Regularization of Contractual Employees - Whether Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) appointed on contractual basis are entitled to regularization after working for nearly two decades - Constitution of India, Articles 14, 16 - Institute denied regularization on grounds that appointments were not against sanctioned permanent posts, relying on Umadevi (3); Petitioners claimed equal pay for equal work and that similarly situated employees were regularized - Court was to determine if appointments were regular under Bye-laws and C&R Rules (Paras 1-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appointments of the petitioners were regular and in accordance with the Bye-laws and C&R Rules of the Institute, and whether they are entitled to be regularized after having worked for two decades?
Law Points
- equal pay for equal work
- regularization of contractual employees
- temporary posts
- absorption against permanent posts
- adherence to recruitment rules
- Umadevi (3) precedent
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (09) 61
W.P. No. 12683 of 2023 C/W W.P. No. 12691 of 2023
Sri. Ranganatha S. Jois for petitioners; Sri. V.G. Bhanu Prakash, Additional Advocate General along with Smt. V. Hemalatha, AGA for R-1; Sri. D.L. Jagadeesh, Senior Counsel for Smt. Rakshitha D.J., Advocate for R-2 and R-3
The State of Karnataka and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 challenging denial of regularization and transfer orders of staff nurses.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of endorsement dated 02.06.2023 denying regularization and transfer orders dated 08.06.2023; direction for regularization with all benefits of regular staff nurses from date of initial appointment.
Filing Reason
Institute refused regularization on grounds that appointments were contractual, not against sanctioned permanent posts, and barred by Umadevi (3). Petitioners contended they had worked for nearly two decades performing same duties as regular staff nurses, and similarly situated employees were regularized.
Issues
Whether the appointments of the petitioners were regular and in accordance with the Bye-laws and C&R Rules of the Institute, and whether they are entitled to be regularized after having worked for two decades?
Submissions/Arguments
For petitioners: Appointed between 2004-2007, worked continuously for nearly 20 years; perform same work as regular staff nurses but receive lower pay, violating equal pay for equal work principle; Institute had regularized similarly situated staff nurses after 5 years; appointments were against sanctioned posts; denial of regularization is arbitrary.
For Institute: Appointments were contractual, temporary, renewable every six months with a break; not against sanctioned permanent posts; Cadre and Recruitment Rules do not provide for regularization of Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) as no such permanent posts exist; Umadevi (3) bars regularization of those not appointed against permanent posts following regular recruitment process.
Judgment Excerpts
Ten Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) working in Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research ... challenging the endorsement issued by the Institute denying their request for regularization.
The OM under which they were appointed does stipulate that the tenure of appointment was two years and the fact that they were to give an undertaking that they would serve the Institute for at least two years does indicate that their appointment would be for a definite period of two years.
It is their contention that they cannot be Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) perpetually, especially when they have admittedly been discharging the same work that the ‘Regular Staff Nurses’ were discharging.
The respondent–Institute ... contends that their appointments were contractual and renewable every six months with a day’s break upon the satisfactory completion of work by the petitioners and subject to the discretion of the Institute.
It is further contended that their initial appointment was not pursuant to a public notification calling for appointments to sanctioned permanent posts and since they had not worked against any sanctioned permanent post, they cannot claim regularization in light of the judgment rendered by the Constitutional Bench in Umadevi (3).
Procedural History
Petitioners filed W.P. No. 12683/2023 challenging endorsement dated 02.06.2023 denying regularization, and W.P. No. 12691/2023 challenging transfer orders dated 08.06.2023. Petitions were heard together and reserved for orders on 26.06.2024. Pronouncement made on 25.09.2024.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 14, 16(1), 226, 227
