GUNDU VISHNU CHANDAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a bunch of two Writ Petitions. Writ Petition No. 10718 of 2016 is filed by the Government of Maharashtra through Secretary, Agriculture Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai along with Deputy Director of Agriculture - Kolhapur and the Agricultural Officer, Taluka Seed Farm Centre, Radhanagari, Kolhapur being the Petitioners to challenge the impugned judgment & order dtd. 24/7/2015 passed by the Industrial Court No. 1, Kolhapur in Complaint (ULP) No. 135/2008. Respondents in this Writ Petitions are 9 persons who are the original complainants namely (1) Gundu Vishnu Chandam, (2) Droupadi Mahipati Patil (since deceased), (3) Vasanti Laxman Moraskar, (4) Baban Dinkar Sankpal, (5) Shankar Rau Kamble, (6) Maruti Pandurang Sangaonkar, (7) Kerba Hari Dhere, (8) Gunda Tukaram Davar and (9) Namdev Pandurang Patade. The impugned judgement & award is passed by the learned Industrial Court on original Complaint (ULP) No. 135/2008 filed by the 9 Respondents whose names are stated above. This Complaint was filed under Sec. 28 r/w Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short, "the Said Act") alleging unfair labour practices and seeking a direction to the Petitioners herein to continue the Respondents as daily wagers, remove disparity in payment of wages, pay equal wages as paid to permanent workmen and to pay differential amount of wages since their date of appointment.

(2.) Second Writ Petition is Writ Petition No. 3724 of 2023 filed by 9 Respondents in the above Writ Petition who are Petitioners therein against the State Government of Maharashtra. In this Writ Petition filed in the year 2023, Petitioners have prayed for the same reliefs which were prayed for and agitated in Complaint (ULP) No. 135/2008 filed before the Industrial Court, Kolhapur and further seeking status of permanency since their date of appointment.

(3.) For the sake of convenience, the first Petition i.e. Writ Petition No. 10718 of 2016 will be considered for narration of facts and parties shall be referred as Petitioners (State Government of Maharashtra) and Respondents i.e. 9 workmen. Facts are identical in both the cases and therefore both Writ Petitions are heard together by consent of parties finally. Interim Application No. 1687 of 2019 filed in Writ Petition No. 10718 of 2016 is also decided along with the Writ Petitions.