Daily wage employees completing ten years of service are entitled to consideration for regularization.

The fourteen petitioners are daily wage employees working with Respondent No. 3 (Municipal Council Khairagarh)

Despite several oral requests for regularization or the grant of permanent status, the petitioners’ services remained non-regularized

the petitioners filed this writ petition seeking a direction for absorption into permanent status with consequential benefits and the setting aside of certain prior rejection orders

During the proceedings, the petitioners sought liberty to submit a fresh representation for consideration within a specified timeframe

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to seek a direction for regularization or permanent status based on their continued service as daily wagers

2. Whether the respondent authorities are obligated to consider a fresh representation regarding the petitioners' employment status in light of established judicial precedents

The court primarily relied on the principles of regularization for temporary and daily wage employees who have completed ten years of service as established in Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Others v. State of Jharkhand & Others (2018)

It further applied the doctrine from Jaggo v. Union of India (2024), which mandates that government departments must provide fair and stable employment and avoid the extended use of temporary labor for roles integral to the organization’s functioning

The court examined the petitioners' claim of continuous service and their prayer for regularization. Applying the ratio from Narendra Kumar Tiwari, the court noted that employees completing significant tenures (10 years) are entitled to consideration for regularization

referencing Jaggo, the court highlighted that prolonged temporary engagement undermines employee morale and contravenes international labor standards

Rather than adjudicating on the merits of each petitioner’s status, the court found it appropriate to permit the petitioners to submit a comprehensive representation to the Municipal Council, ensuring the administrative authorities first exercise their discretion in light of the cited Supreme Court mandates

The court directed the concerned authority to consider and decide the representation in accordance with the law and the cited Supreme Court decisions within a period of four months from the date of receipt. No specific order on permanent absorption was granted at this stage, pending the administrative decision