THE MANAGEMENT, SALEM DISTRICT CENTRAL CO Vs. INSPECTOR OF LABOUR AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE TAMIL NADU INDUSTRIAL ESTABLISHMENTS (CONFERMENT OF OF PERMANENT STATUS TO WORKMEN) ACT 1981

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since in all five Writ Petitions, identical grounds and issues have been raised in respect of the grievances of the workmen as against the management, they are clubbed together and being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as the petitioner/management and the respondents/workmen.

(3.) The facts necessitating to the filing of the present writ petitions are stated hereunder: 3. 1. The respondents/workmen were appointed as Jewel Appraisers in the petitioner/management, which has several branches in Salem Corporation, Namakkal District. They were appointed on various dates spanning from 1986 onwards and they have completed several years of service as on date. Many of them have retired on attaining the age of superannuation. These respondents/workmen who had been recruited by subjecting them to some kind of selection, continued in service uninterruptedly without any break and the work extracted from them was continuous and regular. As such, according to the respondents/workmen, they were full time employees like any other bank employees who were otherwise employed by the petitioner/management in other cadres. 3. 2. According to the respondents/workmen, they had completed more than 480 days of service within a period of two years and therefore, they were entitled to permanent status in their employment under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981 (in short, 'the Act, 1981'). In 2002 and the subsequent period, some of the aggrieved respondents/workmen had approached the authority constituted under the Act, 1981, seeking permanent status, as having completed 480 days of service within a period of two years. Their application under the Act, 1981 was adjudicated by the Inspector of Labour and after consideration of all the materials available and on the basis of evidence let in, the Inspector of Labour had granted the relief of permanent status to all the respondents/workmen by orders dated 31.10.2002 and 15.3.2006. 3. 3. The petitioner/management herein, aggrieved by the orders of the Inspector of Labour, who was arrayed as one of the respondents herein, has approached this Court in W.P.No.3274 of 2004 and 32593 of 2007 etc. This Court, vide order dated 25.9.2008 disposed of said batch of Writ Petitions, permitting the parties to let in evidence in respect of various aspects highlighted in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of "General Manager, Indian Overseas Bank v. Workmen, All India Overseas Bank Employees Union" reported in (2006) 3 SCC 729 . This Court has also directed to consider the issue whether the Jewel Appraisers satisfied the definition of 'workman' under the provisions of the Act, 1981. On remand, the parties had let in extensive evidence and produced materials in advancing their respective cases. After having satisfied with the materials produced on behalf of the respondents/workmen, the Inspector of Labour, ultimately held that the Jewel Appraisers were 'workmen' satisfied the definition under the provisions of the Act, 1981. Thereafter, the Inspector of Labour proceeded further and held that the workmen concerned, had made out a clear case for grant of relief as they satisfied all the criteria as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the afore said decision reported in (2006) 3 SCC 729. Three identical orders were passed by the Inspector of Labour in identical matters in respect of the petitioner/management on 24.3.2010, 30.11.2010 and 15.12.2010. These orders passed by the Inspector of Labour are put to challenge in the Writ Petitions filed by the petitioner/management, viz., W.P.Nos.25109 of 2010, 10119 of 2011 and 27482 of 2011. The other two Writ Petitions, namely, 21299 of 2010 and 22441 of 2011 are filed by the respondents/workmen concerned, seeking to issue Writ of Mandamus, to implement the orders of the Inspector of Labour dated 24.3.2010 and 15.12.2010 respectively.