Employer Cannot Deny Permanent Status by Unilaterally Reclassifying Semi-Skilled Roles to Evade Parity with Similarly Situated Employees

The petitioner was engaged as a Helper on daily wages at the respondent Sugar Company on 01.12.1993 and served for over 30 years

On 03.08.2013, he was granted "seasonal status" as an "unskilled labourer." However, in 2015, his designation was changed to "Oilman," a semi-skilled seasonal post

The petitioner challenged the order dated 17/24.05.2017, passed by the Executive Director, which rejected his representation for permanent status on the grounds that the post of Oilman is seasonal in nature and a government ban on fitment exists

The petitioner alleged discrimination, citing a junior colleague, Mr. Jakir (appointed 2001), who was granted permanent status as a Helper despite having served as an Oilman

1. Whether the respondent's refusal to grant permanent status to the petitioner on the ground of his seasonal designation (Oilman) was legally sustainable

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to parity in treatment regarding regularization/fitment as a Helper based on the precedent set by a similarly situated employee

The Court applied the principle of Article 14 of the Constitution (Right to Equality/Non-discrimination) in the context of service law, emphasizing that administrative decisions regarding fitment or permanent status must be consistent and non-arbitrary

It relied on the doctrine of "parity," holding that if a similarly situated employee (Mr. Jakir) was granted permanent status on a specific post (Helper) despite serving in a seasonal role (Oilman), the same benefit cannot be denied to another employee with longer service

The Court rejected the respondent's contention that a government ban on fitment prevented the petitioner’s regularization

It noted that the petitioner served as a Helper for 22 years before being designated as an Oilman in 2015

The Court observed that the 2013 order categorized the petitioner as an "unskilled labourer" (Helper), whereas Oilman is "semi-skilled," indicating he was essentially a Helper for the bulk of his tenure

Crucially, the Court found that the respondent had granted permanent status to Mr. Jakir as a Helper on 06.05.2017, even though his designation was also Oilman

The Court dismissed the respondent’s oral plea that Mr. Jakir’s designation was a clerical error, noting no amendment to that order was ever made

Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner, having expressed readiness to serve in any Group-D post, was entitled to the same treatment as his junior

The Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 17/24.05.2017, and directed the Executive Director of Doiwala Sugar Company Ltd. to reconsider the petitioner’s claim for permanent status as a Helper on the analogy of the benefit given to Mr. Jakir within six weeks