Contractual employees with prolonged service are entitled to regularization in accordance with established judicial precedents.

The applicant, Panchanan Jena, was initially engaged as an Attendant at the National Institute of Fashion Technology (NIFT), Bhubaneswar, through an outsourcing agency starting on 09.08.2010

On 05.02.2019, the department transitioned him to a short-term contract basis with a consolidated remuneration

The applicant approached the Tribunal seeking regularization of his services.

A primary factual uncertainty noted by the Tribunal was whether the applicant continued to discharge his duties post-01.03.2022

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regularization of service based on his long-term continuous engagement with the respondents first as an outsourced worker and subsequently on a short-term contract

2. Whether the principles of law established in similar matters (e.g., Rama Chandra Pradhan v. UOI) apply to the applicant’s specific terms of engagement

Jaggo v. Union of India (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826)

Shripal & Another v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (2025 SCC OnLine SC 221)

Prem Chand & Ors. v. State of Punjab (Civil Appeal No. 12139 of 2025)

Full Bench decision in Manoranjan Nayak

The Tribunal observed that the facts and legal issues in this case were substantially similar to those in Rama Chandra Pradhan v. UOI & Ors. (OA No. 88/2022)

The court reasoned that if an employee continues to serve over a sustained period under the same terms and conditions, the "balance tilts in favour of the applicant for regularization"

It determined that if the applicant had indeed continued his service to the present date, he would fall under the protective umbrella of the principles set out by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cited precedents, which mandate fair consideration for regularization of long-term contractual staff

The Respondents were granted 90 days from the date of receipt of the order to execute these directions. All pending MAs were disposed of with no order as to costs