The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No(s). 4092-4093/2024 observed that permanent or perennial nature of work couldn’t be undertaken by contract workers and has to be performed by regular or permanent worker. In this matter 13 workers out of 32 workers employed by the appellant were treated as contract workers among the other and were denied regularisation by the appellant on the ground that the work done by them is casual and not perennial or continuous. This matter was initially referred to Central Industrial Disputes Tribunal ("Tribunal"), which had concluded that the nature of work performed by the 13 workmen is the same as that of remaining 19 workers, therefore they are entitled to back wages and regularization of jobs and the nature of work performed by 13 workers are regular and perennial in nature. This matter reached the Hon’ble High Court, which upheld the decision of Tribunal. Following this the appellant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the appellant contended that the Tribunal has no power to grant permanent status to the workers. However, the appellant failed to establish any distinction between the two sets of workers. The Supreme Court held that the Tribunal was justified in conferring the status as the regularized employees and workmen will be entitled to back wages but from the date of the decision of the Tribunal's order, not from the date of employment.
