Continuous service on short-term contracts justifies regularization of outsourced employees under established judicial precedents.

The applicant, aged 24, was initially engaged as a Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) at the National Institute of Fashion Technology (NIFT), Bhubaneswar, through an outsourcing agency starting 18.01.2018

On 04.02.2019, the department transitioned him to a short-term contract basis with a consolidated remuneration

The Tribunal noted that the facts and issues were identical to O.A. No. 88 of 2022 (Rama Chandra Pradhan v. UOI & Ors), with the sole factual uncertainty being whether the applicant’s service continued past 01.03.2022

1. Whether the applicant, having served on a short-term contract following outsourced engagement, is entitled to regularization of service based on prevailing judicial precedents

The Tribunal relied on a series of Supreme Court precedents regarding the regularization of temporary or contractual employees who have served for significant periods. Key authorities included Jaggo v. Union of India (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826), Chander Mohan Negi v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020 (1) OLR SC 865), and Prem Chand v. State of Punjab (Civil Appeal No. 12139 of 2025), which emphasize the rights of long-term contractual workers

It also followed the principle established by the Full Bench of the Tribunal in Manoranjan Nayak and the Apex Court's recent stance in Pawan Kumar v. Union of India (2026 INSC 156)

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s situation was "same/similar/akin" to previous litigations where the balance of equity and law tilted in favor of the employee

While the record did not explicitly confirm employment status post-March 2022, the Tribunal reasoned that if the applicant had continued to discharge his duties to date, the legal principles established in Jaggo and Shripal & Another v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad necessitated his regularization

The court integrated the reasoning from O.A. No. 88/2022, asserting that consistent service under the respondents, even if initiated via outsourcing, creates a valid claim for regularization when the department subsequently engages the worker directly on contract

The Respondents were directed to issue a consequential order for regularization in favor of the applicant, adhering to the principles set by the Hon’ble Apex Court, within 90 days of receiving the order

Pending MAs were disposed of with no order as to costs