Suresh Chandra Shukla vs State Of U.P. And 2 Ors on 6 May, 2025
14. The only difference in the present case and Ram Sewak Yadav (supra) is that in Ram Sewak Yadav, the employee was retained as an ad hoc employee for a long period of time with effect from 02.09.1988 until his regularisation in service on 02.03.2006, whereas, in the present case, the petitioner was retained as a Daily Wager from 19.02.1983 until 26.01.2006, when he was regularised. The retention outside the regular establishment on a continuous basis for along period of time, followed by regularisation in service and absorption in the regular establishment, is key to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Prem Singh to entitle the employee to reckon his services rendered outside the regular establishment for the purpose of entitlement to post-retiral benefits. Then, it does not matter whether the services rendered outside the establishment were ad hoc, daily rated, work charged or of some other description.