Delhi High Court Stays Outsourcing Move for Long-serving University Staff
Varun Singh
14 Oct 2025 4:35 PM IST
The Delhi High Court has granted interim protection to a group of non-teaching staff employed on daily wages at Delhi Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research University (DPSRU), who challenged the University's decision to replace them with outsourced personnel through a manpower agency. The petition, W.P. (C) 14828/2025, was heard by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prateek Jalan on October 10, 2025.
Contentions of the Parties
The petitioners, represented by Mr. Himanshu Yadav, argued that they have been working in various departments of the University for periods ranging from six to ten years, being incessantly reappointed for 89-day terms after nominal breaks. They claimed appointment against vacant sanctioned posts and sought regularization, contending that replacing them with outsourced staff would violate recent Supreme Court precedents including Vinod Kumar Ors. v. Union of India (2024), Jaggo v. Union of India (2024), Shripal Anr. v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (2025), and Dharam Singh Ors. v. State of U.P. (2025).
Citing Jaggo, the petitioners highlighted exploitation of temporary employees and misuse of outsourcing as a shield to evade statutory obligations. They also relied on Tripura High Court's Division Bench in Sri Basudeb Debnath Ors. v. Union of India (2021) and Hargurpratap Singh v. State of Punjab (2007), which frowned upon disengaging long-serving workers by merely citing a change in policy when vacancies persist.
The University, represented by Mr. Rajneesh Tingal, submitted that there was no actual disengagement of staff and that the terms for outsourcing would ensure longer contracts and better leave and benefits for the staff concerned.
Order of the Court
After hearing both sides, the High Court observed that the University's proposal did not entail regular recruitment against sanctioned posts but contemplated a switch to a different ad-hoc engagement via outsourcing. Justice Jalan opined that, prima facie, the petitioners have established a case for interim relief and referred to judicial precedents recognizing their entitlement to continued service where vacancies exist.
Pending a final decision, the Court directed the University to maintain status quo regarding the petitioners' services, ensuring their continued engagement on the same terms as before the writ petition. The order also clarified that petitioners can voluntarily opt for outsourcing if they wish and that the directions are interim, subject to further proceedings. The applications and the writ petition have been slated for hearing on February 19, 2026.
Case Title: Avinash Bansal & Ors. vs. Delhi Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research University & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 14828/2025
Advocate for the Petitioners: Mr. Himanshu Yadav, Ms. Alankriti Dwivedi and Ms. Somesa Gupta, Advocates from Foresight Law Offices India
Advocates for the Respondents: Mr. Rajneesh Tingal and Mr. V.K. Bhawra, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, ASC with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Ms. Vishruti Pandey, Ms. Arpita Goyal and Mr. Bhuwan Raj Seth, Advocates for R-2.
Author: Adv. Varun Singh, Founder, Foresight Law Offices India. Views are based on the order and its personal.