STATE OF M.P. & ANR. versus MD. ABRAHIM

STATE OF M.P. & ANR. versus MD. ABRAHIM

A daily wage worker who was not regularly appointed, and whose appointment did not conform to recruitment rules or the constitutional mandate of Articles 14 and 16, is not entitled to classification in the permanent category merely because another person was so classified.

Parties
Appellant: State of M.P. & Anr.; Respondent: Md. Abrahim
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal From High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned judgment set aside
Legal Topics
Regularization of Service, Public Appointment, Industrial Relations, Equal Opportunity in Employment

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of M.P. & Anr.

Appellant

Md. Abrahim

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal From High Court Order

  1. 1 Whether a daily wage worker is entitled to classification in the permanent category on account of being senior to another classified as permanent
  2. 2 Whether public appointments must conform to the constitutional requirements of Articles 14 and 16

Ratio Decidendi

A daily wage worker who was not regularly appointed, and whose appointment did not conform to recruitment rules or the constitutional mandate of Articles 14 and 16, is not entitled to classification in the permanent category merely because another person was so classified.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment set aside

Orders

  • If it is found that after the death of Iqbal Singh Tuteja the respondent was otherwise entitled to classification in the permanent category, the appellants should accord him the said status.
  • No order as to costs.