of the country’s large labor surplus, and that judicial intervention to regularize workers in some instances is in line with spirit and philosophy of the Constitution.<sup>48</sup> In January 2010 Justice Ganguly lamented in a retrenchment case that the Supreme Court in recent years seemed to be diluting the Constitution to promote the “so-called trends of globalization.”<sup>49</sup> Such criticism of the Supreme Court’s labor policy from its own bench may indicate that the Court may in the future take a more sympathetic view to contract worker’s claims, or at least be preparing to rework its labor jurisprudence.

Thirty of the 43 (70 %) Supreme Court cases dealing with primary, high school, or nonformal education contract teachers were brought by multiple parties, while 18 out of 34 (53%) contract teacher cases at the college level were brought by multiple parties. Whether the cases studied had multiple parties or was brought by a single party seemed to have no measurable impact on the outcome of a case. The involvement of unions in the cases was rarely explicitly mentioned.

_High Courts and the Supreme Court_ The Supreme Court on average overturned the High Court when dealing with a matter involving contract teachers 59% of the time at the primary or high school level (17 overturns to 12 confirms). Meanwhile, the Supreme Court was more likely than not to confirm a High Court decision that dealt with contract college lecturers or professors (11 overturns to 16 confirms). This discrepancy may result from the Court overturning cases decided in favor or primary or high school teachers at a much higher rate than for college teachers, especially post-2000. Rates for confirming cases decided in the High Court against both these types of teachers were similar. In combination, these trends may indicate that High Courts may be more sympathetic to claims of contract teachers at the primary or high school level, while the Supreme Court is more antagonistic towards these claims. This trend may also be an indication that the government may feel it has more at stake in cases involving contract primary or high school teachers and so are more likely to appeal them to attempt to get them overturned.

The highest number of Supreme Court appeals came from Uttar Pradesh and a handful of other states as can be seen by the chart below. Some states like Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, and Jharkhand have no recorded appeals to the Supreme Court despite these states widespread use of contract teachers. A search of the recorded judgments of the Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh High Courts revealed only a handful of cases that dealt with contract teachers. Jharkhand produces more such recorded judgments in its High Court and the absence of appeals from this state, along with Chattisgarh, in the Supreme Court may be explained by the new nature of the states. The absence of reported cases in Madhya Pradesh, though, is mysterious: contract teachers have been widespread there for some time, and there is an active political movement opposing their use in the state.

> 48 Gurbachan Lal Vs. Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra and Ors. 2007(4)SCALE1 para 30-32

> 49 Krishnadas Rajagopal, _Globalization blinds us to aam aadmi plight: SC_ , INDIAN EXPRESS, Jan. 28, 2010, _available at_ http://www.indianexpress.com/news/globalisation-blinds-us-to-aam-aadmi-plightsc/572348/

18