M I ISANI EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SURENDRANAGAR DISTRICT PANCHAYAT Vs. SURENDRANAGAR JILLA PANCHAYAT BANDHAKAM MAJOOR SANGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against an award of the Labour Court Rajkot whereby the workmen who have completed five years of service as on 1-1-1983 as per the seniority list Ex. 26 are ordered to be made permanent with effect from 1-1-1983 and those who have completed five years of service after 1-1-1983 are ordered to be made permanent with effect from the respective dates when they completed five years of service. The employer being aggrieved by granting of this demand of permanency has challenged this award.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner-Management has submitted that the Labour Court has relied on the Government Resolutions Ex. 16 and 17 for making these workmen permanent. However according to the petitioner-Management those Circulars have been thoroughly misread and misapplied by the Labour Court. According to the petitioner-Management under those Circulars the daily wagers who are working on nominal muster roll are to be brought on work charge establishment and it only provides that after minimum service of five years as daily rated workers on nominal muster roll such persons will become eligible for being taken on work charge establishment.

(3.) Ex. 17 is the Government Resolution dated 4-7-1973. It recites that daily workers are taken on nominal muster roll and such workers are working since years ar d not getting any benefits of service and the question of treating such daily rated workers to work charge establishment was under consideration of the Government and after due consideration the Government had decided that whenever the question of recruitment to the posts on work charge establishment arises preference shall be given to the daily rated workers subject to certain conditions; such as seniority atleast five years service relaxation of requirement of coming through employment exchange compliance with the recruitment rules providing for educational qualification experience as regards relaxation in age limit etc. By Ex. 16 the Government Resolution dated 16 1973 a clarification was made to the effect that if a workman has worked for a minimum 180 days in a calendar year he will be considered to have completed one year of service. However for reckoning five years daily rated service average presence shall be of 240 days in a year for becoming eligible to be appointed on work charge establishment. These Government Resolutions which have been relied on by the workmen and which have been relied on by the Labour Court only go to show that the workmen on the nominal muster roll become eligible after five years of service for being taken on work charge establishment. These Resolutions do not provide that at the end of five years of service as daily rated workers they are to be made permanent. Status of permanency is far away from daily rated workmen on nominal muster roll. The Resolutions relied on by the workmen provide that such daily rated workmen on nominal muster roll would become eligible for being taken on work charge establishment. Therefore relying on these two Resolutions the demand for permanency could not have been granted by the Labour Court.