Court Dismisses Appeals Against Regularization; Affirms Employees' Entitlement to Government Benefits
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has upheld the status of hostel and mess employees in government and sponsored polytechnic institutions as Group-D government employees, thereby entitling them to benefits akin to those enjoyed by non-teaching staff in state-aided universities and colleges. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, delivered the judgment on February 9, 2026, dismissing multiple appeals challenging the regularization of such employees.
The case, titled "Director of Technical Education and Training v. Lila Lohar and Others," revolved around the recognition of hostel and mess employees' status and their entitlement to a pay scale, allowances, and other benefits. The appellants, led by Mr. Amal Sen, argued that there was no master-servant relationship between the hostel employees and the institutions, claiming that the Hostel Committee was the true employer. They further contended that prior court decisions supporting regularization were contradictory and warranted a reference to a larger bench.
However, the court found no merit in these arguments. It noted that the issue had been previously settled in related cases, such as "Director of Technical Education and Training v. Chunilal Chakraborty" and "Director of Technical Education and Training v. Madan Mohan Sarkar," where the Supreme Court had dismissed appeals against similar judgments. The court emphasized the doctrine of precedents, stating that substantial judicial resources should not be spent on references unless there is an irreconcilable conflict in judgments.
The court also highlighted a memo dated October 28, 2014, issued by the Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, which conferred the status of non-teaching employees to hostel and mess staff, thus reinforcing their entitlement to government benefits. It dismissed the appellants' reliance on previous contradictory rulings, finding them distinguishable on facts.
In affirming the single judge's order, the Division Bench underscored the principle of judicial propriety, asserting that the appellate power should interfere only when a decision is clearly wrong. The court extended the benefits to the writ petitioners, consistent with previous rulings granting similar status to employees in comparable situations.
The judgment marks a victory for hostel and mess employees, ensuring their recognition as permanent government employees and securing their right to benefits from the date of their appointment. The court's decision is expected to have a broad impact on similar employees across the state.
Bottom Line:
Employees of hostel/mess in Government and Sponsored Polytechnic institutions should be treated as Group-D government employees and entitled to similar benefits as those enjoyed by non-teaching employees in State-aided Universities and Colleges.
Statutory provision(s): Service Law.
