CHITRA SHARMA Vs. AIRLINCE ALLIED SERVICES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged downgrading of her post/status from check Cabin Crew to cabin crew on her transfer from Mumbai to New Delhi and the unethical practice of appointing the Cabin Crew on contract basis though the post of Senior Cabin Crew is of permanent nature.

(2.) THE relevant facts for appreciating the controversies are that the petitioner was appointed as a Senior Cabin Crew for a period of three years from 7th November, 1996 to 6th November, 1999. The appointment of the petitioner was contractual and petitioner was initially employed at New delhi. The appointment letter of the petitioner categorically stipulated that the agreement may be extended or renewed by mutual written agreement between the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner asserted that respondent is a company whose affairs are entirely controlled by Ministry of Civil Aviation, Government of India and it is an instrumentality of the 'state' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The agreement between the petitioner and the respondent has been extended from time to time and is now uptil 30th September, 2009.

(3.) AFTER her appointment the petitioner subsequently completed the period of probation and continued working during the extended period as senior Cabin Crew. While serving as Senior Cabin Crew petitioner after due selection was given the post/status of Check Cabin Crew. After becoming a check Cabin Crew the petitioner worked at New Delhi and thereafter she was transferred to Mumbai. When the petitioner was transferred to Mumbai she continued to hold Check Cabin Crew post/status and she was not appointed to the post of Check Cabin Crew at Mumbai pursuant to fresh selection.