The High Court had held so on the ground that there was non-compliance with the mandate of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v Uma Devi & Ors which had held that the Centre and State governments should take steps to regularise those who have worked for ten years or more in sanctioned posts that are not covered by any court or tribunal orders.
According to the plea before the top court, the High Court had noted that the State had regularised the services of certain individual respondents but the same benefit was not extended to daily wage workers in other cases.
The plea before the Supreme Court said that the benefit was extended to 74 persons as was directed by the Supreme Court.
There is no justification to provide the benefit to all persons who were not part of the case and whose requests for regularisation were rejected by the government.
“The High Court hearing the contempt petition could not have exceeded its jurisdiction in practically issuing a mandamus to regularise the services of daily wage workers whose request had been rejected by specific orders passed by the government,” the plea said.
The Court hearing the contempt petition is required to consider if there is any positive direction to regularise the services of those daily wage workers, the petition added.
Source: Barandbench
