DHARAM SINGH v. STATE OF UP
Discusses principles of fairness, equity, reasonableness in public employment, and constitutional obligations related to Articles 14, 16, and 21.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: 2025 INSC 998
Decision Date: 19-08-2025
List of Laws
U.P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980; Constitution of India, 1949; General Principles of Law; Labour Law
- U.P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980: The judgment mentions that the Commission was established under this Act. The Commission processes large recruitment cycles for teachers and principals and requires ministerial support.
- Constitution of India, 1949: The judgment discusses Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India. It states that State Departments must explain, with evidence, why they prefer precarious engagement over sanctioned posts where the work is perennial, and how the chosen course aligns with these Articles. It emphasizes that sensitivity to the human consequences of prolonged insecurity is a constitutional discipline. The judgment concludes that fairness in engagement and transparency in administration are not matters of grace, but obligations under Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The judgment also notes that long-term extraction of regular labour under temporary labels offends the promise of equal protection.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment extensively discusses the principles of fairness, equity, and reasonableness in public employment. It emphasizes that public employment should be organized with fairness, reasoned decision-making, and respect for the dignity of work. The court criticizes the State's refusal to sanction posts based on "financial constraints" without considering functional necessity and the employer's long-standing reliance on daily wagers. It also highlights the violation of equity in continuing appellants on daily wages despite comparable tenure and duties with those regularized. The judgment also discusses the concept of "ad-hocism" and how it thrives where administration is opaque.
- Labour Law: The judgment references Indian labour law, stating that it strongly disfavors perpetual daily-wage or contractual engagements where the work is permanent in nature. It also discusses the misuse of temporary employment contracts and the exploitation of workers through such practices. The judgment refers to the broader critique of indefinite "temporary" employment practices.
🔒 For Members Only