The Supreme Court directed the Center to regularize daily wage workers employed by the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) within four weeks, observing that they also have an indispensable role in the success of India’s space mission and the state cannot ignore or discriminate against them, as a model employer.
Wednesday’s ruling rebuked the Center for dragging these workers, who were hired between 1991 and 1997, through lawsuits spanning various courts, even as the Supreme Court issued clear instructions in 2011 to make them permanent.
Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said: “In celebrating the glory of our scientific fraternity, we must not ignore the unseen but indispensable contributions of every individual who formed a part of this larger enterprise… Ignoring or discriminating against such individuals in matters of service recognition would undermine the collective spirit that has propelled India to the moon and beyond.”
The Center represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S D Sanjay opposed the workers’ plea on the grounds that they perform sporadic and intermittent work, such as loading, unloading and transporting materials, on an as-needed basis, and have never been appointed to any posts prohibited for regular or permanent employment.
“The success of a rocket or satellite mission is not the only result of high-level design and propulsion engineering. It is also the result of a seamless support chain, from material transportation to facility maintenance and countless additional tasks that ensure operational efficiency.”
The petitioners were represented by Advocates N Subramanian and Pranav Sachdeva.
Justice Nath, who wrote the judgment, said: “The last man standing in this chain, who often belongs to the Group C or Group D services, performs duties that may seem sporadic or marginal in isolation. However, without their dedicated support, materials and logistics essential for scientific progress will falter in reaching the laboratories and assembly halls of our scientists.”
The court reminded the Center of ISRO’s early beginning when the first sounding rocket launched from Thumba in 1963 was transported on a bicycle to the launch site and India’s first experimental telecom satellite APPLE tested in 1981 was placed on an ox cart.
The court noted that these workers were working at ISRO’s main R&D unit – the Liquid Propulsion Systems Center in Mahendragiri (Tamil Nadu) – which has been declared a restricted area under the Official Secrets Act.
“The State, as a model employer, cannot afford to treat a segment of its workforce, those who have contributed, even indirectly, to national endeavors of the utmost importance, with arbitrariness or indifference. To deny them even the basic courtesy of recognized service status, while they reap the benefits of their work, strikes at the roots of justice and dignity in public employment,” the ruling said.
The struggle of these workers, who are represented in the Supreme Court by advocate Pranav Sachdeva and others, began in 2009 when they first approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to regularize their situation. This led to a ruling on 9 March 2010 in their favour. The CAT directed the Center to sanction the jobs and make these workers permanent. The Supreme Court upheld this order on July 29, 2011.
After that, the Center introduced the workers’ gang scheme that continued the suffering of the workers by describing them as “temporary” workers.
The bench said: “We must express our strong disapproval at the manner in which the respondents (Center and ISRO) have dealt with the present case. The State’s obligation to act as a model employer is not merely an exhortation but flows directly from the guarantee of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. The present case illustrates how a litigant, who is often placed on the margins of the system, is forced to go through a long and arduous legal process just to secure the right owed.”
The court set aside the scheme and ruled that “the defendants are therefore directed to regularize the services of the appellants and to grant them permanent status with effect from 9 September 2010 (which is the outer limit set by the court to frame the scheme), within a period of four weeks from the date of this order.”
Although only seven workers approached the Supreme Court, the court extended the benefit of its decision to all similarly situated workers employed under the 2012 scheme.
