Consequential benefits must remain subject to the outcome of reconsideration for regularisation.

The State appealed against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 15 March 2021 in connected writ petitions concerning the respondents’ claims for regularisation.

The Single Judge directed the authorities to reconsider the claims and to grant consequential benefits flowing from regularisation in accordance with law.

The State’s appeals were confined to the direction concerning consequential benefits.

1. Whether the direction to grant consequential benefits could stand while the authorities were directed to reconsider the respondents’ claims for regularisation.

The Court applied the principle that consequential benefits dependent on regularisation cannot be granted unconditionally when the underlying claim for regularisation remains subject to reconsideration.

Such benefits must depend on, and be subject to, the outcome of that reconsideration.

No substantive statutory provision or precedent was relied upon in the Court’s reasoning.

The Court held that reconsideration of the regularisation claims and a direction to grant all consequential benefits could not operate independently: entitlement to those benefits necessarily depended on whether regularisation was granted.

The latter direction therefore required clarification so that it would not predetermine the result of the authorities’ reconsideration.