MOHAMMAD FARU I. QURESHI Vs. PALANPUR NAGARPALIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts of LPA No. 448 of 2017 with LPA No. 527 of 2017 with LPA No. 528 of 2017 The original petitioners in these petitions were working as Conductors with the Palanpur Nagarpalika. It was their case that they were appointed as Bus Conductors after due process of selection, through an advertisement. After their initial appointment in the year 1986 on probation, their services were confirmed by order dated 24.02.1988 with effect from 01.11.1987.

(2.) The petitioners were constrained to approach this Court as, the Nagarpalika by the impugned communications dated 11.01.2007 and 29.01.2007, put their services to an end, without affording an opportunity of hearing. According to the petitioners, the Nagarpalika in its meeting of 31.10.2006, resolved that, as the Transport Service run by the Nagarpalika was running at a loss, and as the government desired that services of a Nagarpalika which were running at a loss be either closed down or privatized, the transport services of the Nagarpalika be handed over to a private contractor. Pursuant to such a resolution, the Nagarpalika issued consequential orders inviting tenders to operate their transport system, through private operators and consequentially the services of the petitioners who had rendered 20 years of service as regular conductors were put to an end without following the due provisions of law especially the provisions of Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(3.) It was the case of the petitioners that the Municipality had no financial constraints as they had purchased the new buses. Their salaries due were not paid and therefore the action of unceremoniously terminating their services violated the constitutional guarantee enshrined under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.