Non-Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Civil Appeal No. 4443 of 2021
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.12171 of 2019)
Vice Chancellor Anand Agriculture University
.... Appellant(s)
Versus
Kanubhai Nanubhai Vaghela and Anr.
…. Respondent (s)
WITH
Civil Appeal No. 4444 of 2021
(@ SLP (C) No. 11429 of 2021 @ Diary No.3021 of 2019)
Civil Appeal No. 4445 of 2021
(@ SLP (C) No.15957 of 2019)
J U D G M E N T
L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
Leave granted.
1. The point that arises for consideration in these appeals
is whether the daily wagers/respondents are entitled for
regularization of their services.
1 | P a g e
2. The appellant university engaged daily wagers at
different agricultural research centers who are skilled, semiskilled, unskilled and field labourers. The daily-wage workers
have been working as plumbers, carpenters, sweepers, pump
operators, helpers, masons etc. An industrial dispute was
raised by the daily wagers seeking regularization of their
services. The Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot directed the
appellant to regularize the services of all the daily-rated
labourers who have completed 10 years of service as on
01.01.1993 with pay and allowances along with other
benefits of the permanent Class IV employees. The writ
petition filed by the appellant against the judgment of the
industrial tribunal was partly allowed by the High Court. The
judgment of the industrial tribunal was set aside and the
appellant was directed to make payment to the workmen at
the minimum of the pay scale and to frame a scheme for
regularization of such daily-rated labourers. The Letter
Patent Appeal filed by the management was dismissed.
During the pendency of the appeal filed against the
judgment of the High Court by the appellant, a scheme for
regularization of daily-rated labourers of Gujarat Agricultural
University was framed.
2 | P a g e
3. According to the scheme, all daily wagers who have
completed 10 years or more of continuous service with a
minimum of 240 days in each calendar year as on
31.12.1999 shall be regularized as regular employees with
effect from 01.01.2000 and shall be placed in the time-scale
of pay applicable to the corresponding lowest grade in the
university subject to certain terms and conditions. One of
the conditions is that the daily-rated wagers shall be eligible
and must possess the prescribed qualification for the posts at
the time of their appointment on daily-rated basis. It was
proposed in the scheme that the regularization will be
against the posts/vacancies of the relevant categories. The
daily-wage employees shall be regularized in a phased
manner to the extent of available regular sanctioned
posts/vacancies on the date of regularization and on the
basis of seniority-cum-suitability including physical fitness.
Such of those daily wagers who have completed 10 years of
continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in each
calendar year as on 31.12.1999 but could not be regularized
shall be treated as monthly rated employees w.e.f.
01.01.2000 in the fixed pay without allowances.
3 | P a g e
4. The appeal filed by the university against the judgment
of the High Court was disposed of by a judgment dated
18.01.2001 in Gujarat Agricultural University vs.
Rathod Labhu Bechar & Ors.
1
It was argued on behalf of
the appellant therein that it would not be possible for the
university to grant permanency to all its employees working
as daily-rated workers, who have completed 10 years of
service as on 01.01.1993. Therefore, the scheme proposed
granting permanent status to all such employees who have
completed 10 years or more of continuous service with a
minimum of 240 days as on 31.12.1999. It was further
contended by the university that daily wagers are not
entitled to get the minimum wages of Class IV employees of
the State.
5. An argument was advanced in the aforementioned
appeal before this Court that all the daily wagers cannot be
regularized or minimum pay scale cannot be given in view of
the financial constraints. It was brought to the notice of this
Court that there were 5100 daily-rated labourers. This Court
rejected the said submission and observed that financial
stringency is not a ground to deprive the daily wagers of
their right for regularization in accordance to the scheme.
1 (2001) 3 SCC 574
4 | P a g e
6. After considering the proposed scheme, this Court
accepted the submission on behalf of the daily wagers that
prescription of certain qualifications to be fulfilled at the time
of appointment as a condition for regularization was not
justified. This Court observed that it would not be
appropriate to disqualify the daily wagers on the ground that
they did not fulfill the prescribed eligibility criteria on the
date when they were engaged initially as daily wagers. While
considering the point related to the absorption of all the daily
wagers at one point of time or in a phased manner, this
Court observed that regularization can be made phase wise.
It was made clear that posts should be created to absorb
maximum number of workers who have completed 10 years
as on 31.12.2000. The scheme proposed by the university
was approved by this Court subject to certain modifications
suggested. The additional regular posts required to be
created by the university was directed to be done
expeditiously. The first phase of absorption was directed to
be completed within a period of 3 months and the scheme to
be implemented expeditiously.
7. During the course of hearing, we were informed that
the State Government passed a resolution on 01.04.2002
5 | P a g e
creating 890 posts for absorption of daily wagers in the
university. It has also been brought to the notice of this
Court that the State Government dissolved the erstwhile
Gujarat Agricultural University in 2004 and constituted four
new agricultural universities. The petitioner is one of the
four agricultural universities. There are 740 daily wagers
working in the university.
8. The respondents/daily wagers in these appeals filed
writ petitions in the High Court of Gujarat seeking
regularization in accordance with the scheme floated by the
State of Gujarat and approved by this Court. The contentions
of the petitioners in the writ petitions was that they were
working in Class IV posts and they were eligible to be
absorbed in accordance with the scheme. Though a number
of colleagues of the respondents/daily wagers were given the
benefit of regularization of their services, they were denied
the same.
9. Writ petitions filed by the daily wagers were allowed by
a common judgment of the High Court of Gujarat on
13.03.2018. The appellant university was directed to treat
the respondents as permanent employees from the date they
have completed 10 years of service as daily wagers. The
6 | P a g e
appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Division
Bench of the High Court of Gujarat affirming the direction of
the learned single judge to regularize the services of
respondents/daily wagers.
10. At the time of issuance of notice, we were informed by
the learned senior counsel, appearing for the appellant that
the benefits given to the respondents by the judgment of the
High Court will not be withdrawn. We make it clear that the
regularization of the services of respondents shall not be
disturbed.
11. We have heard Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned senior counsel
for the university and Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, learned counsel for
the respondents. The main contention of the university is
that after the judgment of this Court in Secretary, State of
Karnataka and Ors. vs. Umadevi and Ors.
2
, the
respondents are not entitled for regularization as there are
no sanctioned posts available. Another submission made on
behalf of the appellant is that the judgment of this Court
dated 18.01.2001 in Gujarat Agricultural University
(supra) does not survive after the judgment of this Court in
Uma Devi. It is no doubt true that in Umadevi’s case, it
has been held that regularization as a one-time measure can
2 (2006) 4 SCC 1
7 | P a g e
only be in respect of those who were irregularly appointed
and have worked for 10 years or more in duly sanctioned
posts. However, in the instant case the respondents are
covered by the judgment of this Court in Gujarat
Agricultural University (supra). This Court approved the
proposed scheme of the State of Gujarat and directed
regularization of all those daily wagers who were eligible in
accordance with the scheme phase-wise. The right to be
regularized in accordance with the scheme continues till all
the eligible daily-wagers are absorbed. Creation of additional
posts for absorption was staggered by this Court permitting
the appellant and the State of Gujarat to implement the
scheme phase-wise. We are not impressed with the
submissions made on behalf of the university that the
judgment of this Court in Umadevi’s case overruled the
judgment in Gujarat Agricultural University (supra). The
judgment of this Court in Gujarat Agricultural University
(supra) inter partes has become final and is binding on the
university. Even according to Para 54 of Uma Devi’s case,
any judgment which is contrary to the principles settled in
Umadevi shall be denuded of status as precedent. This
observation at Para 54 in Umadevi’s case does not absolve
8 | P a g e
the university of its duty to comply with the directions of this
Court in Gujarat Agricultural University (supra).
12. It was brought to the notice of this Court by Mr. P.S.
Patwalia, learned senior counsel for the university that 890
posts were created coterminous with the services of those
daily wagers who have been absorbed in those posts. He
made a valiant effort to impress upon this Court that no
further posts have been created and therefore, the remaining
daily wagers cannot claim regularization of their services.
Creation of 890 posts is by way of implementation of the
directions given by this Court in Gujarat Agricultural
University (supra) at the first stage. There is no ambiguity
in the directions given by this Court in Gujarat Agricultural
University (supra) that the obligation on the part of the
university to implement the scheme by regularizing all the
eligible daily wagers continued.
13. By an order dated 17.10.2011, persons similarly
situated to the respondents were absorbed by being given
the benefit of regularization. The Division Bench of the High
Court has taken note of the discriminatory approach of the
university in conferring the benefit of regularization to some
and not to all those daily wagers who are eligible. There is
9 | P a g e
no error in the Judgment of the High Court which warrants
interference by this Court. Eligible daily wagers in
accordance with the scheme have been eagerly awaiting
regularization as per the judgment of this Court in Gujarat
Agricultural University’s case (supra). The right of the
respondents for regularization has been correctly recognized
by the High Court.
14. For the aforementioned reasons, the appeals are
dismissed.
.....................................J.
[ L. NAGESWARA RAO ]
.....................................J.
[ ANIRUDDHA BOSE ]
New Delhi,
July 26, 2021.
10 | P a g e
