MANABHAU DAMU KHAIRNAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugnes an order of the industrial Court, Nasik dated 21st June 1989 made in Revision Application (ULP) No. 6 to 9 of 1989 and Revision Applications (ULP) No. 19 to 21 of 1989, under the provisions of the maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ).

(2.) THE petitioners were employed as Muster Assistants to do the clerical work in the Forest department and their duty consisted of recording attendance of unskilled labourers who were employed in the Panlot Niyajan Scheme which was taken up under the Employment Guarantee scheme formulated by the State of Maharashtra under the provisions of the Maharashtra employment Guarantee Act, 1977. The Petitioners were working as Muster Assistants continuously from March 1984. It is not in dispute that the Petitioners were not required to do manual unskilled work at any time and they were not paid the unemployment allowance payable under the Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act. With effect from 31st August 1987, their services were orally terminated without any previous notice or payment of wages in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation.

(3.) THE Petitioners challenged the termination of their services by Complaints (ULP) No. 147 to 150 of 1987 before the Labour Court at Dhule, under the provisions of the Act alleging that their abrupt removal from the services without complying with the provisions of Section 25f of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, amounted to an unfair labour practice within the meaning of Item 1 of Scheduled IV of the Act. The Labour Court held that the orders terminating the services of the Petitioners were illegal and that thereby the Respondents had engaged in an unfair labour practice within the meaning of Item 1 of Schedule IV of the Act. It also directed reinstatement of the Petitioners, but without back wages. Being aggrieved by the refusal of back wages, the petitioners filed, Revision Application (ULP) No. 19 to 21 of 1989, while the Respondents challenged the direction in the order of then Labour Court granting reinstatement by their revision Applications (ULP) No. 6 to 9 of 1989, the Industrial Court, Nasik, allowed Revision application (ULP) No. 6 to 9 of 1989 preferred by he Respondents and set aside the order of the labour Court. It also dismissed Revision Application (ULP) No. 19 to 21 of 1989 filed by the petitioners. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioners are before this Court by the present writ petition.