Contractual nomenclature cannot override constitutional equality protections

The mere nomenclature or formal labeling of an engagement as contractual cannot denude an employee of fundamental constitutional protections guaranteed under Article 14 and Article 16. The State, having utilized the services of qualified workers on sanctioned posts for over a decade pursuant to a regular process of selection, cannot hide behind standard contractual disclaimer clauses to justify abrupt terminations or to refuse consideration for regularization. Formal contractual terms must yield to the broader constitutional imperative of non-arbitrariness, human dignity, and fairness in public employment. (Bhola Nath v. The State of Jharkhand | 2026 INSC 99)