COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI Vs. PRAVIN SHANTARAM GHAG MAHESH SHANTARAM GHAG RAKESH VITTHAL JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present writ petition instituted under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have called in question the legality and correctness of the Judgment and Award dtd. 5/1/2019 rendered by the Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai in Reference (I.T.) No.10 of 2014.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present proceedings, as pleaded by the original complainants, may briefly be stated thus. The Municipal administration of the City and Suburbs of Mumbai is divided into 24 wards. There are approximately 1269 municipal schools functioning under the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. The sanctioned strength includes 231 posts of Mali-cum- Caretaker and 602 posts of Hamal. Out of these, 94 posts of Mali- cum-Caretaker and approximately 300 posts of Hamal are stated to be vacant. It is the case that during the period 1991-1992, the Education Officer issued tenurial appointment letters engaging respondent No.1 on daily wage basis to discharge duties as Mali- cum-Caretaker. A Circular dtd. 23/1/1992 was thereafter issued by the Education Officer recording that, by Office Order dtd. 14/12/1991, the Deputy Municipal Commissioner (Improvement) had delegated powers to the Administrative Officer (Schools) to make appointments of Mali-cum-Caretaker, Hamal and Sepoy on daily wage basis, along with prescribing the terms and conditions governing such appointments.

(3.) The respondents were engaged prior to 31/3/2002 as daily rated workers for carrying out duties such as maintenance of gardens, watering of plants, opening and closing of school premises and safeguarding of property. It is not in dispute that the nature of work so performed is of a regular and perennial character within the schools. In the year 2001, a demand was raised by the Municipal Mazdoor Union and other recognised unions before the Municipal Commissioner seeking regularisation of such daily wage workers in view of existing vacancies. As the demand remained unresolved, the Union proposed to resort to strike action. In the year 2002, the Municipal Commissioner intervened, assured the recognised unions that the demand would be considered, and advised them to refrain from striking and to continue work. The respondents accordingly continued in service as daily rated workers up to the year 2002. Pursuant to deliberations held on 27/11/2002, the Corporation formulated a Scheme of Regularisation, commonly referred to as the Scheme of 2002. The said scheme was brought into effect by Circular No. PKA/1944/SC and contemplated continuation, regularisation and absorption of daily rated workers. The scheme provided that those workers who had completed 240 days of continuous service in a calendar year would be appointed on probation for two years, whereas those who had not completed 240 days would be appointed on probation for three years.