HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED Vs. PEER BHAKTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS By these appeals, the appellants have taken an exception to the Judgment and Order dated 20th December, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.49823- 49837/2014 (S-REG), by which, writ petitions filed by the workmen/respondents herein were allowed in part with a direction to the first appellant to absorb the respondents in the employment of the first appellant subject to fulfillment of certain conditions.

(2.) With a view to appreciate the controversy, a brief reference to the facts of the case is necessary:

(3.) The first appellant has filed a counter statement to the writ petition, raising issues of maintainability of the writ petitions and delay. It was contended that the employment of the respondents cannot be regularized, inasmuch as, they are the casual employees employed by the contractors of the appellants. A preliminary objection was also raised that before invoking the remedy under Articles-226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the respondents have not exhausted alternative and efficacious remedy available to them under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the I.D. Act').