Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The Union Of India And 6 Ors on 11 March, 2025
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010036962021
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1707/2021
DHANAPATI LAHKAR AND 6 ORS
S/O LT. HAREN LAHKAR, R/O VILL. LACHIMA, P.O. SARTHEBARI, DIST.
BARPETA, ASSAM
2: AJIT DAS
S/O RATAN CHANDRA DAS
R/O VILL. AND P.O. DADARA
DIST. KAMRUP
ASSAM
3: MOHAN DAS
S/O LT. KHARGESWAR DAS
R/O VILL. AKADI
P.O. DIHINA
HAJO
DIST. KAMRUP
ASSAM
4: TARANI BORO
S/O LT. RAHI RAM BORO
R/O VILL. AND P.O. GAPIA
DIST. KAMRUP
ASSAM
5: BHAINUR ALI
S/O LT. KHASFUR ALI
R/O VILL. AND P.O. MARANJANA DIST. KAMRUP
ASSAM
6: UMESH CHANDRA DAS
S/O LT. HABIRAM DAS
R/O VILL. AKADI
P.O. DIHINA
HAJO
Page No.# 2/4
DIST. KAMRUP
ASSAM
7: ATTAR ALI
R/O VILL. BAMUNIGAON
P.O. CHANGSARI
DIST. KAMRUP
ASSA
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF
COMMUNICATION, SANCHAR BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-1
2:THE CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. (BSNL)
NEW DELHI-1
3:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. TASK FORCE
ASSAM
TELECOM CIRCLE
GUWAHATI-1
ASSAM
4:THE DIRECTOR
TASK FORCE
SILCHAR
DIST. SILCHAR
ASSAM
5:THE DEPUTY GENEAL MANAGER
TASK FORCE
O/O CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER
TELECOM
TASK FORCE
GUWAHATI-1 ASSAM
6:THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
TASK FORCE AT SHILLONG
LAITUMUKHRAH
SHILLONG
7:THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
(TP-II)
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI-
Page No.# 3/4
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.K. Das, Advocate
Mr. N.K. Sarma, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Pathak, Advocate
Mr. B. Hazarika, Advocate
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
11.03.2025
(Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)
The petitioners herein approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati
Bench (hereinafter to be referred as 'CAT') with the prayer that the respondents be
directed to regularize their services under the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary
Status and Regularization) Scheme, 1989, on the ground that they already had
completed the required 240 days in employment of the respondent BSNL. In support
of their claim, the petitioners relied upon certain documents, such as, certificate
showing their continuous engagement with the BSNL, findings of Verification
Committees etc.
Before the CAT, the respondent BSNL took a stand that since the originals of
the said documents were not produced and the same were only photocopies, which
were also not authenticated, the petitioners were not entitled to get any relief on the
basis of the said documents.
The Tribunal has rejected the claim of the petitioners for regularizations, only on
the ground that since the documentary evidence produced by the petitioners in
support of their claim of regularization were not authenticated and were not original
ones, no relief could be granted to them.
The claim of the petitioners before this Court is that they have discharged their
Page No.# 4/4
primary burden by producing the photocopies of the relevant documents and now it is
for the employer BSNL to come out with a clear case that no such documents are at
all in existence. It is contended that the respondent BSNL has simply stated that the
originals are not available with them, but they have not disputed the fact of existence
of these documents at any point of time.
Be that as it may, it is to be noticed that the petitioners were engaged by the
BSNL years before and till date they are continuing with the BSNL as casual labourers.
Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Jaggo Vs. Union of India
and Ors. and Anita and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors., reported in 2024
SCC OnLine SC 3826, has opined that when casual labourers remain in
engagement for years together, their cases for regularization are to be considered
irrespective of the riders provided in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka
& Ors. Vs. Umadevi & Ors., reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1.
Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the BSNL has frankly submitted that there is no
dispute regarding the fact that the petitioners are still continuing as casual labourers
in the BSNL and their cases are required to be considered as per the latest judgments
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
At this stage, Mr. Pathak seeks 10 days' time to complete his instructions.
List this matter after 10(ten) days, as prayed for.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
