Legal Analysis: Sukhendu Bhattacharjee and Others v. The State of Assam and Others

Citation: 2026 INSC 523

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: A Division Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta

Date of Decision: May 21, 2026

Nature of Judgment: Civil Appeal Nos. 4514 of 2025 and connected matters arising out of the judgment of the High Court of Gauhati dated 8th June 2017 in Writ Appeal No. 45 of 2014.

Synopsis of the Judgment

The appellants were Muster Roll and Work Charged workers engaged by the Government of Assam prior to 1st April 1993, who had rendered long and continuous service for decades. Pursuant to a Cabinet decision dated 22nd July 2005, the State regularized approximately 30,000 similarly situated workers by creating personal posts. However, the appellants were left out due to clerical errors, inadvertent omissions, and administrative lapses. The High Court (Division Bench) set aside the Single Judge’s order directing regularization, holding that the appellants’ engagement was not against sanctioned posts and therefore fell outside the one‑time exception under Umadevi. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, holding that: (i) the appellants’ claim was not based on the Umadevi exception but on the State’s own Cabinet policy of 2005; (ii) the State having regularized nearly 30,000 identically placed workers, denying the same benefit to the appellants was arbitrary and violative of Article 14; (iii) the State’s undertakings before the High Court created a legitimate expectation; (iv) Umadevi cannot be used as a shield to deny fair treatment to long‑serving workers who were excluded due to the State’s own lapses. The Division Bench’s judgment was set aside, and the Single Judge’s order was restored. Directions were issued for regularization, consequential benefits, and pension. Separate directions were given for Work Charged employees and another group of ferry workers.

1. Basic Information of the Judgment

Case Title: Sukhendu Bhattacharjee and Others v. The State of Assam and Others (with connected appeals)

Citation: 2026 INSC 523

Civil Appeal Nos.: 4514/2025, 4516/2025, 4515/2025, 4517/2025, 4518/2025, 4519/2025, 4520/2025, 4523/2025

Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta

Date of Decision: May 21, 2026

Court: Supreme Court of India (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Impugned Order: Judgment and order dated 8th June 2017 of the Gauhati High Court in Writ Appeal No. 45 of 2014, setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge dated 20th December 2013.

2. Legal Framework

Major Laws and Provisions Involved

• Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14 (equality before law – equal treatment for similarly situated persons), Article 16 (equality of opportunity in public employment), Article 226 (writ jurisdiction of High Courts).

• Service jurisprudence – Regularization of temporary, casual, muster roll, and work charged employees; principles of legitimate expectation, promissory estoppel, and model employer.

• State Cabinet decisions and executive policies – Binding nature of policy decisions; State cannot implement a policy partially and arbitrarily exclude eligible persons without rational basis.

• Assam Financial Rules and PWD Code – Recognized modes of engagement.

Key Precedents Cited and Applied

• Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1 – Constitution Bench judgment prohibiting regularization of employees appointed de hors sanctioned posts, except a one‑time measure for irregularly appointed employees in duly sanctioned vacant posts who had worked for ten years or more without court protection (paragraph 53).

• State of Karnataka v. M.L. Kesari (2010) 9 SCC 247 – Clarified that the one‑time measure under paragraph 53 of Umadevi applies to all employees who had put in

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.