LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-578

S.ANSAR BADHUSHA Vs. 1ST ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT

Decided On December 16, 2019
S.Ansar Badhusha Appellant
V/S
1St Additional Labour Court Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved against the award dated 28.03.2017 made in I.D.No.247 of 2014, wherein and whereby, the Labour Court directed the Management to place the petitioners herein at the bottom of the seniority list with retrospective effect and to re-fix the seniority and grant monetary benefits accordingly.

(2.) These petitioners are employed in the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The panel list for the post of Commercial Inspector and Line Inspector was prepared on 24.06.2004. The grievance of the petitioners was that their names were not included in the said list. According to the petitioners, they made a representation to the Superintendent Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chengalpet, for promotion with effect from 24.06.2004 and thereafter, the selection list for promotion to the post of Commercial Inspector in the panel was approved on 09.03.2007 and consequently, the petitioners were promoted as Commercial Inspectors on 15.03.2007. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board prepared the selection list for promotion to the post of Foremen-I in the year 2009 and however, the petitioners' names were wrongly omitted to be included in the said list. However, it is stated that the petitioners' names were subsequently included at Serial Nos.4 and 11 and they were promoted as Foremen-I on 12.08.2010. The third respondent/Union challenged the inclusion of the petitioners' names in the seniority list before the Labour Court by filing I.D.No.247 of 2014. The Labour Court passed the impugned award by holding that the third respondent/Union herein, the petitioner therein, has justified that the inclusion of the petitioners' names in the approved list of the Management dated 12.08.2010 was wrong and that their names should have been placed at the bottom of the list. Accordingly, the Tribunal gave a direction to the Management to place these petitioners at the bottom of the list with retrospective effect and re-fix the seniority.

(3.) Heard both sides.