'Workers Can't Be Denied Permanent Status Merely Due To Unavailability Of Sanctioned Posts': Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that workmen who have completed the requisite period of continuous service cannot be denied permanent status merely on the ground that sanctioned posts are unavailable. The Court emphasised that such a denial would amount to continued exploitation of the workers, contrary to welfare legislation and the mandate of social justice.

Justice Milind N. Jadhav was hearing a writ petition filed by 22 forest labourers employed at the Sanjay Gandhi National Park, who had been working since 2003 in roles including watchmen, gardeners, cooks, and cage attendants for wild animals. Their duties involved high-risk tasks such as feeding tigers, lions, and leopards, cleaning cages, administering medicines, and undertaking patrolling and fire control in the park. Although they had worked continuously for decades alongside permanent employees, their claim for permanency was rejected by the Industrial Court on the grounds that no sanctioned posts were available.

The petitioners argued that they had all completed 240 days of service in each calendar year for over five consecutive years, as recorded in the attendance registers maintained by the Forest Department. They relied on the Government Resolution dated 16 October 2012, which required daily wage workers to be granted permanency on completion of 240 days' service over five years. The State, however, opposed the plea, contending that the petitioners were only temporary workers, not appointed through any sanctioned posts or selection process, and that the 125 supernumerary posts created under the 2012 Resolution were already filled.

The Court observed that the petitioners' work was identical to that performed by permanent employees, and they were engaged in hazardous duties with little protection. It held that denying them permanency solely because no sanctioned posts were available would perpetuate unfair labour practices and exploitation. It observed:

“… once Petitioners have complied with the twin conditions of 240 days of work in each calendar year continuously for a period of 5 years, and they are still being continued by the Forest Department for years together, they cannot be deprived of permanent status on the ground of unavailability of a sanctioned post. If the Government's argument is accepted, it would amount to enslavement of these workmen and bonded labour.”

The Court remarked that the workers who have been working continuously for decades alongside permanent workmen cannot be deprived of the status of permanency, earned leave, casual leave, sick leave, medical facility, coverage under Provident Fund Schemes and all such other social welfare enactments.

Accordingly, the Court quashed the Industrial Court's order dated 12 December 2022 and directed the State to grant permanency to the petitioners. It also directed the computation and payment of outstanding differential wages within eight weeks, with compliance to be reported to the Court thereafter.

Case Title: Rahul Pittu Savalkar & Ors. v. Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Anr. [Writ Petition No. 2683 of 2023]

Click Here To Read/Download Order