#Ad Hoc Employment

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that continuous ad-hoc service, when later regularized without any break, must be counted toward qualifying service for gratuity under the U.P. Retirement Benefit Rules, 1961. This clarifies a critical entitlement for thousands of state employees whose initial appointments were temporary but later formalized, ensuring fair computation of retirement benefits.

Bombay High Court rules that ad hoc employees under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) with prolonged service are entitled to regularization and consequential benefits, reinforcing the principle of legitimate expectation in public employment. The judgment mandates permanency from the date of entry into service, impacting thousands of contractual government employees.

The J&K & Ladakh High Court reiterates that writ petitions under Article 226 cannot challenge termination of ad hoc employment by non-State bodies unless a public law duty is violated. Private contractual disputes must be resolved through civil remedies, reinforcing the boundary between public and private law.

Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that long-term contractual employees performing perennial duties must be regularized; financial constraints cannot override Articles 14, 16 and 21.

Chhattisgarh High Court holds that regularization of ad hoc workers cannot be granted with retrospective effect to avoid disrupting seniority of regular employees.