Bombay High Court Orders Regularization of Navi Mumbai Pump Operators, Declares Long-Term Ad Hoc Engagement Unfair.


10 September 2025 Civil Writ Petition >> Civil & Consumer Law  

In a path-breaking verdict giving importance to the rights of contractual and ad-hoc employees performing perpetual duties, the Bombay High Court upheld an Industrial Court decree directing the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) to regularize the services of pump operators engaged in water supply operations.

The matter arose out of an age-old controversy concerning 116 workmen who were conducting water pumps in the area of Navi Mumbai, initially under CIDCO and subsequently under the NMMC. A lot of such workers had been employed for decades, sometimes through contractors, yet were working round the clock to provide continued water supply.

Although the Corporation had regularized 87 employees in 2003, some of them were later dropped without notice. The employees, who were covered by their union, asserted that the work they performed was necessary, seasonal, and directly supervised by the Corporation, thereby entitling them to permanency and equal benefits by law.
 
 

The Industrial Court in 2006 had held merit in these arguments, terming the Corporation's action as unfair labour practice under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act) and directed complete regularization along with back wages.

It was opposed by the Corporation on the basis that the employees were never appointed to sanctioned posts, were recruited ad-hoc only, and regularization was not viable in law. These arguments were, however, rejected by the High Court, reiterating that the evidence clearly established direct employment, continuous service, and control by the Corporation, hence conclusively establishing a "master and servant" relationship.

Justice Milind Jadhav explained that the Corporation could not shy away from its statutory requirement by hiding behind contractors, particularly when it had itself identified the need for pump operators and had been issuing time-bound appointment letters. The Court heavily relied on recent Supreme Court judgments, including Dharam Singh v. State of UP (2025), reminding public authorities of the fact that they are "constitutional employers" and cannot perpetuate insecurity by employing staff temporarily on a short-term basis for permanent work.

The High Court directed the Corporation to re-employ the 48 surviving pump operators in permanent service within a week, with full continuity, arrears in wages, and issue of permanency certificates. The Court also directed compliance within two fortnights, albeit granting a stay of four weeks to the Corporation to appeal to the Supreme Court.

This ruling restores a settled judicial course against the resort to contractual or ad-hoc provisions for workers performing permanent work, and sends a clear message that fiscal constraints or administrative sloth cannot override underpinning labour rights.


Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971