Prudeta
Prudeta
2026 INSC 431
📌 Paras 2-3
The appellants were daily-wage employees engaged between 1991 and 1997. After the respondent formulated a scheme for temporary status and regularization of casual labourers in 1993, the appellants sought regularization. Their initial application to the Tribunal resulted in a direction to formulate a scheme or ad-hoc rules for permanent engagement. This direction was affirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. Subsequently, the respondent framed the 'Gang Labourers (Employment for Sporadic Types of Work) Scheme, 2012', which the appellants contended was not in compliance with the earlier directions. The Tribunal and High Court ultimately rejected the appellants' claim for regularization under this scheme.
📌 **Para 5.1, Pa
The bench further analyzed the constitutional validity of the impugned provisions and discussed the interpretation of Articles 14 and 21 in light of recent precedents...
Citing the ratio in prior decisions, the court held that the legislative intent was to ensure...
No credit card required · 14-day free trial