Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Kharadi Kamleshbhai Chhaganbhai and others, filed three Special Civil Applications under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Gujarat High Court seeking regularization of their services. They were appointed as Class-IV employees on fixed wages after their names were called from the Employment Exchange and they were interviewed. They had been working continuously since 2003 on fixed wages without being regularized. The petitioners relied on a decision of a learned Single Judge of the same court dated 15.6.2015 in Special Civil Application No.6026 of 2015, which was confirmed by the Division Bench on 23.1.2023 in Letters Patent Appeal No.2 of 2016, and the Supreme Court had dismissed the State's Special Leave Petition. The petitioners argued that they were similarly situated and sought similar benefits. The State opposed, contending that the petitioners sought regularization, not the same relief as in the cited case. The court, after hearing both sides, found no dispute that the petitioners were appointed through the Employment Exchange and interviewed, and had worked since 2003 on fixed wages. The court held that the petitioners were entitled to the same benefits as granted in the cited decision and directed the respondents to pass appropriate orders for regularization within eight weeks. The petitions were allowed accordingly.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Regularization - Fixed-Wage Employees - Petitioners appointed as Class-IV employees on fixed wages since 2003 after being called from Employment Exchange and interviewed - Court directed regularization following a prior decision in Special Civil Application No.6026 of 2015 confirmed by Division Bench and Supreme Court - Held that petitioners are entitled to similar benefits as granted in the cited case (Paras 2-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners, appointed on fixed wages since 2003 after being called from Employment Exchange and interviewed, are entitled to regularization of their services in light of a prior decision of the same court confirmed by the Division Bench and the Supreme Court.
Final Decision
The petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders for regularization of the petitioners' services within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order, considering the decision in Special Civil Application No.6026 of 2015.
Law Points
- Regularization of fixed-wage employees
- parity with similarly situated employees
- binding precedent
- direction to pass appropriate orders within eight weeks
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (03) 1144
R/Special Civil Application No. 7689 of 2017 with 7696 of 2017 and 13330 of 2017
Ms. Ashlesha M. Patel for petitioners, Mr. Sidhdharth Rami, AGP for respondents
Kharadi Kamleshbhai Chhaganbhai & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Service matter seeking regularization of fixed-wage Class-IV employees.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought direction to respondents to grant regularization benefits similar to those granted in Special Civil Application No.6026 of 2015.
Filing Reason
Petitioners were appointed on fixed wages since 2003 after being called from Employment Exchange and interviewed, but were not regularized.
Previous Decisions
A learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.6026 of 2015 dated 15.6.2015 granted similar benefits, confirmed by Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.2 of 2016 dated 23.1.2023, and Supreme Court dismissed SLP.
Issues
Whether the petitioners are entitled to regularization of their services on the basis of the decision in Special Civil Application No.6026 of 2015.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that they are similarly situated to the employees in the cited case and should be granted the same benefits of permanency.
Respondents argued that the petitioners seek regularization, not the same relief as in the cited case.
Ratio Decidendi
Employees appointed on fixed wages after being called from Employment Exchange and interviewed, working continuously for a long period, are entitled to regularization if similarly situated employees have been granted such benefit by a binding precedent.
Judgment Excerpts
There is no dispute between the parties that the names of all these petitioners have been called for from the Employment Exchange and after having interviewed them, they have been given appointment to the post of Class-IV, albeit, on a fixed wages.
All these petitioners are working since 2003 till the date on a fixed wages and they have been deprived to get the benefit of regularization.
Hence, the present petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders for regularization of the services of the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed three Special Civil Applications under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Gujarat High Court in 2017 seeking regularization. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 23.3.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
