Uttarakhand High Court Criticizes State Government Order on Employee Regularization
In a significant judicial development, the Uttarakhand High Court has addressed a long-standing issue concerning the regularization of UPNL-sponsored employees, highlighting that a recent state government order "failed" to fully implement an earlier court directive. The court observed that the order dealt only with wage payments and did not provide for job permanency, as mandated in its previous ruling on regularizing UPNL-sponsored contractual pharmacists.
Hearing Details and Petitioner Arguments
Hearing a special appeal on March 25, a bench comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay considered a plea by Deepak Kumar and others. Their petition for regularization had earlier been dismissed. The appellants, who have worked as contractual pharmacists for over a decade, argued that their case was overlooked and that a key direction in the Kundan Singh judgment was not properly considered.
Background: Kundan Singh Judgment and Supreme Court Upholding
In its November 18, 2018 ruling in the Kundan Singh case, the High Court had directed the state government to regularize UPNL-sponsored employees in a phased manner within one year. Additionally, it mandated the payment of minimum pay-scale with dearness allowance along with arrears. The Supreme Court dismissed the state's special leave petitions against this order on October 15, 2024, effectively upholding the directive and reinforcing the need for compliance.
State Government's Compliance Efforts and Court Observations
During the hearing on March 25, the bench noted that although the state had constituted a seven-member committee to ensure compliance, its February 3, 2026 order addressed only the payment component. Crucially, it made no provision for phased regularization, which is a core requirement of the original directive. The court emphasized that this omission represents a significant failure in implementing the judicial mandate.
Pending Case and Adjournment
Observing that the issue of implementing the Kundan Singh directions is also under consideration in another pending case, the court adjourned the matter to April 8. It directed the state to file an affidavit detailing how it has complied with the original directive on regularization. This step aims to ensure transparency and accountability in the process, pushing for a comprehensive resolution that includes both wage payments and job security for the affected employees.
The court's stance underscores the importance of adhering to judicial orders in their entirety, particularly in matters affecting employee rights and welfare. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for similar regularization issues in the state and beyond, highlighting the ongoing challenges in balancing administrative actions with legal obligations.
