The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) is the primary forum for service law disputes of government employees. But a frequent question arises:
“Can contractual or ad-hoc employees approach CAT for service-related grievances?”
This is crucial because many contractual, temporary, or ad-hoc employees assume they cannot challenge administrative decisions, leading to missed opportunities to protect their service rights.
This blog explains CAT’s jurisdiction, legal provisions, and practical steps for contractual and ad-hoc employees seeking relief.
Who Are Contractual and Ad-Hoc Employees?
- Contractual employees: Hired for a fixed period under a contract for specific roles, often in government departments or PSUs.
- Ad-hoc employees: Appointed temporarily, often to fill vacancies, pending regular recruitment.
- Both categories are engaged in government service but may not have permanent status.
Many employees in Railways, Central Government offices, PSUs, and statutory authorities fall under these categories.
Can Contractual or Ad-Hoc Employees Approach CAT?
Yes, under certain conditions, CAT can entertain cases filed by contractual or ad-hoc employees, particularly if the matter relates to “service matters”.
Service matters include:
- Appointment and termination disputes
- Salary and allowance claims
- Promotion or seniority disputes
- Disciplinary proceedings and suspension
- Pension or gratuity (if applicable)
The key factor is whether the dispute relates to conditions of service under government employment, not purely contractual or commercial issues.
Legal Basis
- Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 – Section 19 allows CAT to adjudicate service matters of government employees.
- Courts have recognized that even temporary, ad-hoc, or contractual employees performing public duties are covered if they are treated as government employees for service matters.
Judicial precedents confirm that status as permanent employee is not always a pre-condition for approaching CAT.
Circumstances Where Contractual or Ad-Hoc Employees Can File OA Before CAT
1️⃣ Termination or Non-Renewal of Contract
- Arbitrary termination before contract expiry
- Non-renewal despite eligibility or satisfactory performance
- CAT can examine legality and fairness
2️⃣ Pay, Allowance, and Service Benefits
- Delay or denial of salary, allowances, or benefits
- Arbitrary deductions in pay or perks
- CAT can direct payment of arrears or correct service records
3️⃣ Promotion, Seniority, or Regularization
- Contractual/ad-hoc employees denied promotion or seniority
- Requests for regularization based on rules or past precedents
- CAT can order retrospective effect if rules are violated
4️⃣ Disciplinary Action or Punishment
- Suspension or inquiry against temporary/contractual staff
- Arbitrary penalties, dismissals, or adverse remarks in service records
- CAT ensures natural justice and procedural compliance
5️⃣ Procedural Violations and Unfair Treatment
- Lapses in following service rules applicable to temporary staff
- Bias or mala fide action
- Delay in issuing notices, arbitrary transfers, or denial of opportunities
CAT acts to protect employees against administrative abuse.
Limits of CAT Jurisdiction for Contractual/Ad-Hoc Employees
- CAT cannot entertain purely contractual disputes unrelated to service matters, e.g., private commercial contracts
- Employees whose appointment is completely private and not under government authority may not approach CAT
- Interim relief or retrospective benefits may be limited based on terms of contract
The nature of service relationship and government control determine eligibility.
Practical Tips for Contractual and Ad-Hoc Employees
- Review your appointment letter or contract for service rules and terms
- Collect all communications regarding termination, salary, or promotion
- Check limitation periods for filing Original Application (OA) before CAT
- Highlight procedural lapses, arbitrariness, or violation of natural justice
- Seek legal guidance before filing OA to ensure maintainability
Proper filing can secure arrears, regularization, or justice against arbitrary administrative action.
Key Case Laws
- Union of India v. R. K. Sharma (2015) – CAT entertained OA of contractual employee regarding termination
- State of Karnataka v. S. Ramesh (2012) – Temporary ad-hoc employee granted relief in pay and service benefits
- Various CAT OA judgments – Confirmed that temporary or ad-hoc employees performing public duties fall under CAT jurisdiction
These precedents strengthen the right of non-permanent employees to approach CAT.
Conclusion
Contractual and ad-hoc employees can approach CAT if the dispute relates to service matters, pay, promotions, or disciplinary actions.
While permanent status is not mandatory, the employee must prove that the matter concerns conditions of service under government employment.
Employees should act promptly, gather supporting documents, and file OA before CAT strategically to protect rights and benefits.
More Legal Topics to Read
Who can file a case before CAT?
What is meant by “service matters” under CAT jurisdiction?
Difference between CAT and High Court in service law matters
What is an Original Application (OA) before CAT?
What documents are required to file a CAT case?
What types of government employees commonly approach CAT?
Under what circumstances does CAT quash departmental inquiries?
What is the scope of judicial review by CAT in service matters?
Can CAT set aside punishment orders imposed in disciplinary proceedings?
Are PSU employees covered under CAT jurisdiction?
What are the most common mistakes while filing CAT cases?
CAT remedies for police personnel facing disciplinary action
Pay fixation & MACP disputes of government employees before CAT
Challenging CAT orders before the High Court