SC DIRECTS REGULARIZATION OF LONG-SERVING DAILY WAGE EMPLOYEES IN U.P. EDUCATION COMMISSION

by | Aug 20, 2025

Supreme Court of India judgment on regularization of daily wage workers in U.P. Education Commission

Supreme Court delivers justice for daily wage employees in U.P. Education Commission, 2025


SC DIRECTS REGULARIZATION OF LONG-SERVING DAILY WAGE EMPLOYEES IN U.P. EDUCATION COMMISSION


CASE SUMMARY – The Supreme Court in Dharam Singh & Ors. v. State of U.P. (2025) addressed the plight of daily wagers serving since 1989–1992 in the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission. Despite performing perennial duties, they were denied regularization as the State repeatedly rejected proposals citing financial constraints. The Allahabad High Court dismissed their petitions relying on Umadevi. The SC held the refusals arbitrary, quashed them, and directed retrospective regularization from 24.04.2002, payment of arrears, recalculation of pensions, and creation of supernumerary posts. It emphasized that financial constraints cannot override fairness and dignity in public employment.


ASPECTS DETAILS
Case Title Dharam Singh & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Anr., Civil Appeal No. 8558 of 2018
Introduction The case concerns the rights of daily wage employees who worked for decades in the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission without regularization despite performing perennial duties.
Factual Background Appellants served as Class-III/IV employees between 1989–1992 on daily wages. Despite repeated Commission resolutions seeking sanctioned posts, the State rejected proposals citing financial constraints. Their writ petitions and appeals in the High Court were dismissed.
Legal Issues Whether refusal to sanction posts citing financial constraints was arbitrary, and whether long-serving daily wagers are entitled to regularization.
Applicable Law
  1. Article 14, 16, 21 of the Constitution;
  2. Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1; precedents in Jaggo v. Union of India (2024) and Shripal v. Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad (2025).
Analysis SC held that the High Court misdirected itself by treating the plea as mere regularization instead of testing arbitrariness of State’s refusal. Repeated reliance on financial constraints while extracting perennial work was unreasonable. Comparisons showed selective regularization.
Conclusion The SC quashed State refusals, held them arbitrary, and directed creation of supernumerary posts to regularize appellants with retrospective effect (24.04.2002), payment of arrears, pension recalculations, and compliance within fixed timelines.
Current Scenario Following the 2024 merger of the Commission into U.P. Education Services Selection Commission, SC clarified structural change cannot erase accrued claims. Outsourcing cannot be used to deny fairness. The State must now comply with SC’s binding directions.

 

“The State cannot balance budgets on the backs of those who perform the most basic and recurring public functions.”

 

SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

READ ALSOSC UPHOLDS QUASHING OF FIR IN MOHAN DELKAR SUICIDE CASE

 

Written By Nancy Sharma

I am Nancy Mahavir Sharma, a passionate legal writer and a judicial service aspirant who is interested in legal researching and writing. I have completed Latin Legum Magister degree. I have been writing from past few years and I am excited to share my legal thoughts and opinions here. I believe that everyone has the potential to make a difference.

Related Posts