Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Regularisation of Long-Serving Chowkidars; Holds State Cannot Exploit Workers Citing Lack of Sanctioned Posts

Case Name: Baljinder Singh v. Punjab Financial Corporation and Others (with connected matters)
Citation: CWP-24609-2025, CWP-24820-2025 & CWP-24614-2025 (O&M)
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed three connected writ petitions and directed regularisation of services of long-serving Chowkidars engaged by the Punjab Financial Corporation. The Court held that denial of regularisation on the ground of non-availability of sanctioned posts is impermissible when employees have rendered continuous service for decades against perennial work. Termination of services after rejection of regularisation was held to be arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, and contrary to binding precedent.

Summary: The petitioners, engaged as Chowkidars for nearly three decades, challenged orders rejecting their claims for regularisation and subsequent notices discontinuing their services. Their principal contention was that an earlier judgment of the High Court had already directed consideration of their regularisation, and the respondent-Corporation had acted in defiance of that judgment by citing absence of sanctioned posts and discontinuing their services.

The respondents argued that regularisation could not be granted due to non-availability of sanctioned posts. However, they were unable to dispute that the petitioners were not contractual, daily-wage, or part-time workers and had continuously discharged duties of a perennial nature.

The High Court relied on authoritative precedents of the Supreme Court and Division Benches of the High Court to reiterate that long-term engagement of employees on ad hoc basis for perennial work cannot be justified by pleading lack of sanctioned posts or financial constraints. The Court strongly deprecated the practice of exploiting workers for years and denying them security of tenure, holding that such conduct violates constitutional guarantees of equality, fairness, and dignity of labour.

Emphasising the role of the State as a model employer, the Court held that once continuous service over a significant period is established and the work is integral to the organisation, regularisation must follow. The impugned rejection orders and termination notices were therefore set aside.

Decision: All three writ petitions were allowed. The Punjab Financial Corporation was directed to regularise the services of the petitioners with all consequential benefits. The Court further clarified that failure to pass formal regularisation orders within the stipulated period would result in deemed regularisation, with entitlement to counting of past service and attendant benefits.