Long-term contractual employees are entitled to regularization in accordance with established judicial principles and precedents.

The applicant served as a Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) at NIFT, Bhubaneswar, initially through outsourcing starting July 26, 2010.

On February 5, 2019, he was engaged directly by the department on a short-term contract basis with consolidated remuneration.

The record was silent on whether the applicant's service continued under the same terms after March 1, 2022.

1. Whether the applicant, having served as an outsourced and later contractual employee, is entitled to regularization of service based on established judicial precedents.

Jaggo v. Union of India (2024), Shripal Another v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (2025), and Prem Chand v. State of Punjab (2026).

These rulings establish that long-standing service under state instruments may entitle workers to regularization to prevent exploitation and ensure fair labor practices.

The Tribunal also referenced the Full Bench decision in Manoranjan Nayak concerning similar service disputes.

The Tribunal found that the facts of the present case were "same/similar/akin" to a previous case, Rama Chandra Pradhan v. UOI Ors. (OA No. 88/2022).

It reasoned that if the applicant had continued his duties uninterrupted, the "balance tilts in favour of the applicant for regularization".

The court linked the applicant's tenure (starting from 2010 outsourced and 2019 contractual) to the principles of equity and service law articulated in the cited Supreme Court judgments, determining that the respondents were obligated to follow the legal standards set for regularizing long-term attendees of a department.

The respondents were directed to comply with this order, following the principles set in Jaggo and Prem Chand, within 90 days of receiving the order. Pending MAs were disposed of with no order as to costs.