RAM S/O PYARELAL KHICHER Vs. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have questioned their termination order dated 31st March, 1995 served on them on 3.4.1995 by the respondent/Municipal Council, Ramtek. According to the petitioners it was in breach of the Model Standing Orders framed under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946.

(2.) Three complaints bearing Complaints (ULPA) Nos. 431 of 1995, 432 of 1995 and 433 of 1995 were lodged under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of the Trade unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "MRTU & PULP Act") before the Industrial Court, Nagpur Bench which were disposed of by common order dated 29th June, 2004. It was alleged that the respondent/employer were engaged in unfair labour practice within the meaning of Item Nos. 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act and complainants prayed for setting aside their termination of service and reinstatement with continuity of service & full back wages.

(3.) The facts, briefly stated, are thus : Complainant Sunita in Complaint (ULPA) No. 431 of 1995 was appointed as a Sweeper on 1.9.1994. Complainant Geeta in Complaint (ULPA) No.432 of 1995 and Complainant Ram in Complaint (ULPA) No.433 of 1995 were appointed as Sweepers on 8.12.1994 in clear vacancy. It is contended that having rendered continuous service of three months, the complainants became permanent employees, but the respondent, without giving them an opportunity to show cause and without any domestic inquiry, in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the Standing Orders, terminated their service.