Welcome back to Caseon!
Log in today and discover expertly curated legal audios and how our AI-powered, tailor-made responses can empower you to navigate the complexities of your case.
Stay ahead of the curve—don’t miss out on the insights that could transform your legal practice!
As per case facts, petitioners in multiple Writ Petitions were engaged as NMRs/Daily wage employees in Gram Panchayats and a Municipality between 1988-1990. Their services were not regularized despite working
...continuously for many years, even after Gram Panchayats merged into Greater Visakha Municipal Corporation. They sought regularization based on G.O.Ms.No.212 and Supreme Court judgments regarding employees completing ten years of service. Respondents resisted, citing lack of proof of engagement and non-fulfillment of criteria. The question arose whether these petitioners, being similarly placed to others whose services were regularized, were also entitled to regularization. Finally, the High Court, referencing Supreme Court and Division Bench precedents, directed the respondent Corporation to examine each petitioner's case individually, based on seniority, and decide on regularization from the date of an available sanctioned vacancy within six months, also mandating payment of time scale.
This is a faithful reproduction of the official record from the e-Courts Services portal, extracted for research.
To ensure "Contextual Integrity," all AI insights must be cross-referenced with the official PDF,
which remains the sole authoritative version for judicial purposes.
This platform provides research aids, not legal advice; verify all content against the official Court Registry before legal use.
Legal Notes
Add a Note....