BHAGWAN DAS Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners by this writ petition seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to place them above respondents 3 to 7 in seniority. Direction is also sought against respondents 1 and 2 i.e University of Delhi and Delhi University Press to grant to the petitioners appropriate pay scales as that of Compositors and also direct deduction of contributions towards Provident Fund and ESI. Petitioners also seek direction to respondents 1 & 2 to grant arrears of salary at the rate and dates from when their juniors are being paid as Compositors. Regularization of service is also sought on the footing that respondents 3 to 7, who were junior to them have been regularized.

(2.) The admitted facts as emerge from the record may be noted: Petitioners were working as Daily Wagers from 16.1.1975 in the Delhi University Press. Petitioners claim that their services were illegally terminated w.e.f. 25.1.1976. Disputes had arisen, which were referred by the State Government to the Labour Court on 9.5.1977. The Labour Court after trial gave its award on 23.1.1990. While holding the petitioners to be daily wagers, it did not accept the management's contention that they had left employment of their own. The termination was held to be illegal and without any cause and without following the requisite procedure under Section 25 of the ID Act. As a consequence, the Labour Court directed reinstatement of the petitioners with back wages. One of the petitioners i.e petitioner no.6 namely Balesh Chand, was found to be in gainful employment between 1.2.1980 to 1982 and was not granted back wages. The respondents challenged the award of the Labour Court in a writ petition which was dismissed. The respondents pursuant to the award of the Labour Court and dismissal of the writ petition, have reinstated the petitioners.

(3.) The main plank of the submission of the Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Anis Suhrawardy is that the Labour Court having found the termination illegal and having directed reinstatement with back wages, the petitioners are entitled to continuity of service with all consequential benefits flowing therefrom. It is stated that respondents 3 to 7, who were junior to the petitioners have been regularized in service. Accordingly, it is urged that the petitioners who were also entitled for continuity in service being senior to respondents 3 to 7, having been engaged prior to them, should be granted regularization and seniority over the said respondents. He submits that petitioners would also be entitled for absorption as permanent employees and payment at the same pay scale as was applicable to respondents 3 to 7.