STATE OF HARYANA versus SURINDER KUMAR AND ORS.

STATE OF HARYANA versus SURINDER KUMAR AND ORS.

The respondents, appointed as daily wage clerks, are not entitled to pay parity or regularisation unless duly selected and appointed in accordance with statutory rules and Supreme Court guidelines. Age relaxation is permitted for the period worked; equal pay is only from date of regular appointment. Recruitment not following rules invalidates claim for same pay as regular employees.

Parties
Appellant: State of Haryana; Respondent: Surinder Kumar and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 March 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Decision
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Regularisation, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Daily Wage Employees, Recruitment Rules, Disciplinary Actions
Service Law Regularisation Equal Pay for Equal Work Daily Wage Employees Recruitment Rules Disciplinary Actions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Haryana

Appellant

Surinder Kumar and Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether daily wage employees are entitled to parity in pay with regular employees
  2. 2 Whether the services of daily wagers can be regularised
  3. 3 Validity of the recruitment process for daily wage employees

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents, appointed as daily wage clerks, are not entitled to pay parity or regularisation unless duly selected and appointed in accordance with statutory rules and Supreme Court guidelines. Age relaxation is permitted for the period worked; equal pay is only from date of regular appointment. Recruitment not following rules invalidates claim for same pay as regular employees.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Orders of the High Court set aside
  • Appellant (State/authorities) to consider the cases of respondents for appointment to service in accordance with law and guidelines, if otherwise eligible