MANAGEMENT Vs. LABOUR INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The intra-Court Appeal arises out of the order dtd. 14/9/2011 in W.P. No. 14637 of 2011 passed by the Learned Judge of this Court. The parties are hereinafter referred to as per their description in the Writ Petition for the sake of convenience.

(2.) According to the Petitioner, his name was sponsored by the employment exchange to join the services of the Second Respondent, viz., the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kovai Division-1) Ltd. as Driver and he was temporarily appointed by order dtd. 26/5/2000 and alloted Staff No. 18348 by order dtd. 24/5/2000. It is further contended by the Petitioner that his services ought to have been regularised with effect from 30/4/2001 as per the settlement then in force which had been entered between the Management of the Second Respondent with its recognised Trade Unions as per Sec. 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, but the said benefit had not been extended to him, while his junior V. Balakrishnan (Staff No. 18401) was regularised with effect from 1/6/2001 by an order dtd. 22/3/2003. However, the Second Respondent citing the settlement dtd. 31/8/2005 entered between its Management and their recognised Trade Unions, made the Petitioner permanent with effect from 1/9/2005. The Petitioner filed an application before the First Respondent, under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981, for permanency at-least with effect from 12/4/2001 taking into account the date of completion of 480 days in 24 calender months under the provisions of that Act which has a overriding effect on the aforesaid settlement dtd. 31/8/2005. The First Respondent by proceedings R.C. No. E/4332/2007 dtd. 30/7/2009 rejected the claim of the Petitioner, which was challenged by him in W.P. No. 14637 of 2011 seeking consequential direction to confer permanent status on completion of 240 days with time scale of pay and other monetary benefits.

(3.) The Writ Court by order dtd. 14/9/2011 referring to the earlier decision of this Court in the order dtd. 6/6/2011 in W.P. No. 9080 of 2011 etc., batch, held that the Petitioner was entitled to the same benefits granted to similarly placed persons and directed the Respondents to confer permanent status on the Petitioner with effect from 12/4/2001. Aggrieved thereby, the Second Respondent has preferred this appeal.