MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HIGANGHAT Vs. VITHAL MAROTRAO KAMDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

(2.) By the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 15-10-2005 made by the Industrial Court, nagpur in Complaint U. L. P. No. 204/2001, directing the petitioner to make complainant permanent on the post of gardener and give him all consequential benefits from the date of filing of the complaint. This petition is treated as one under Article 227 of the Constitution considering the nature of order passed by the industrial Court.

(3.) Facts :- The respondent-employee had filed complaint before the industrial Court, Nagpur vide complaint U. L. P. No. 204/2001. In the complaint, he averred that since 1990 he has been working on daily wages as gardener with the petitioner - Municipal council and he also worked in various other departments including construction, octroi, sanitation etc. In the list of employees working on daily wages as on 31-3-1996, his name has been shown. The petitioner-Council regularized the services of employees, who happened to be close to the members of the Council and even juniors to him were regularized in service, but the complainant having put so many years of service was deprived of the benefits of permanency and, therefore, the petitioner was engaged in unfair labour practice within the meaning of Item Nos. 5, 6 and 9 of Schedule-IV of the M. R. T. U. and P. U. L. P. Act. He then submitted that in accordance with the Model standing Orders, he having completed the required period of service, has acquired the status of permanent employee.