R GOVINDAN Vs. MANAGEMENT OF BHARAT HEAVY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE batch of writ petitions have been filed by the employees of the respondent-Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (for short, 'BHEL') having its unit at Ranipet. The admitted position is that the petitioners have either completed Diploma in engineering course or underwent I.T.I. training. They were also trained apprentices in terms of the Apprentices Act, 1961.

(2.) REGARDING the first writ petition (i.e.) W.P.No.11293 of 2006, it is admitted by both sides that it has become infructuous, as the very same petitioners have filed subsequent writ petitions. Therefore no relief need be granted in this writ petition.

(3.) THE said judgment of the Madurai Bench of this Court was taken on appeal by the respondent-BHEL before the Division Bench sitting at Madurai in W.A.(MD) Nos.685 to 687 of 2007. THE Division Bench presided by P.K.Misra, J. by judgment dated 14.5.2008 dismissed those Writ Appeals. THE Division Bench has held that in respect of the respondent-BHEL, there is a promotion policy guaranteeing employment to trained apprentices and a reference was also made to the settlement reached at Ranipet. THE Division Bench also rejected the BHEL's attempt to produce the certified copies of agreement, wherein the right of employment has been denied. However, the Division Bench held that those agreements do not relate to the writ petitioners before the Division Bench and therefore in the absence of the BHEL producing the true terms of the contract, the copies produced by them with reference to other employees was not accepted by the Division Bench. In the present set of cases, all the petitioners were trained by the BHEL plant at Ranipet. THErefore, the learned senior counsel for the workmen placed heavy reliance upon the Division Bench's order and stated that it is in no way different from the case of employees relating to the Tiruchirappalli plant.