Topic
Contractual employees in India are workers hired temporarily under fixed-term agreements, often without the benefits or job security of regular government or private sector staff.
Rajasthan High Court reinforces that contractual employees are entitled to full salary during maternity leave, directing payment within one month. The ruling sets a binding precedent for all contractual workers under the Medical and Health Department, ensuring compliance with maternity benefit norms.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that contractual female employees are entitled to 730 days of child care leave under Rule 38-C, grounded in Articles 38 and 39 of the Constitution. This landmark extension ensures welfare protections for vulnerable families, particularly those caring for children with terminal illnesses, regardless of employment status.
HP High Court strikes down Sections 6, 7, and 8 of the Himachal Pradesh Recruitment Act 2024 for being arbitrary and violative of natural justice, directing the state to reconsider contractual employees' regularization claims. The ruling mandates adherence to constitutional principles in employment laws, impacting thousands of contractual workers in Himachal Pradesh.
Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench rules that contractual ambulance drivers under the National Health Mission with over 14 years of service must be paid at the regular pay scale and considered for regularization, reinforcing the principle of equal pay for equal work. The judgment mandates compliance with the State Government Resolution dated 04/12/2024, ensuring wage parity and procedural fairness for long-term contractual employees.
CAT Srinagar rules that guest faculty engaged through formal selection processes cannot be replaced by similar contractual arrangements and must continue in service until regular appointments are made. The ruling reinforces the principle of legitimate expectation and service continuity for adhoc employees in public employment.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that termination of a contractual employee under the Haryana Contractual Employees (Security of Service) Act, 2024, is invalid if the employee is acquitted in an internal enquiry. The court mandated reinstatement with continuity of service, reinforcing statutory protections for contractual workers against arbitrary termination.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that contractual employees with 10+ years of service are not entitled to automatic regularization but must be protected from replacement under the Hargurpratap Singh precedent. The court directed Haryana to decide their regularization via a reasoned order within three months, ensuring job security in the interim.
Delhi High Court rules that contractual employees engaged through transparent public recruitment and serving over 15 years cannot be indefinitely kept on contractual terms. The Court mandates consideration for regularisation under Articles 14 and 16, rejecting the State's use of contractual labels to bypass constitutional guarantees for public employment.
Madras High Court rules that contractual employees with over ten years of continuous service are entitled to notional regularisation for terminal benefits like gratuity and seniority, but not monetary arrears. The judgment reinforces substantive equality under Article 14, impacting public employment policies and service law jurisprudence.
Bombay High Court holds that contractual employees are entitled to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, irrespective of agreement terms.
Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that contractual employees under Samagra Shiksha Project cannot be deprived of DA due to fiscal mismatch between Central and UT authorities.
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.