DIVISIONAL SECRETARY MAHARASHTRA Vs. MOHD NAIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Writ Petition, the employer Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Nagpur has challenged the order dated 02.08.2006 passed by the Industrial Court, Nagpur in ULPA Revision No. 90/2004, as also the judgment and order dated 07.07.2004 passed by the First Labour Court, Nagpur in ULPA Complaint No. 174/1996. The Labour Court directed the petitioner / employer to reinstate the respondent / employee with continuity and full backwages. The employer then approached the Industrial Court in above mentioned revision and Industrial Court has quashed and set aside the grant of backwages, but maintained the direction to reinstate the complainant / employee with continuity. This Court has on 13.10.2006 while issuing notice in the matter, directed maintenance of status quo and while issuing Rule in the matter on 10.04.2008 this Court granted interim relief in terms of prayer clause (ii), i.e. it stayed the operation and effect of order dated 02.08.2006 passed by the Industrial Court.

(2.) The facts in brief are that, the complainant / employee claimed that he was engaged on daily wages from October, 1990 by oral order as class-III employee. He was issued identify card and was being paid daily wages @ Rs.20/-. He rendered continuous services and completed 240 days while working as clerk. But then his services were not regularised and along with other employees he filed ULPA Complaint before the Industrial Court for permanency. On 30.08.1991 when he went to perform his duties as usual, he was not permitted to resume his duties and was told that his services were terminated. Complaining that this oral termination was in violation of section 25F and 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the complainant approached the Labour Court on 2.12.1991 alleging unfair labour practice under Item 1 Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "MRTU & PULP Act"). As the complaint was belated, he moved application vide Misc. ULP No. 64/1992 for condonation of delay, which was granted by the Labour Court on 12.10.1995. The employer then filed written statement and contended that it was not an Industry. It further stated that the complainant was not appointed on any clear vacant post and it was only within the power of the State Government to create or to sanction a post. It was also stated that the complainant was being engaged on daily wages as clerk during examinations when there was additional work load and regular staff was unable to cope up with it & that discontinuation of his services became necessary because of reduction of work and also for avoiding unnecessary expenditure and for maintenance of secrecy of the regular work of the Board. Board also contended that because of continuation of such workers, the regular employees used to shirk their responsibilities and practice resulted into nepotism and daily wagers therefore, used to exert pressure for their regularisation or to absorb them on temporary establishment. On 30.08.1991 in all 118 daily rated employees including 76 clerks were discontinued. It was also pleaded by the employer that the complainant moved Industrial Court for very same relief by filing ULPA Complaint No.972/1991, which was withdrawn by him and thereafter he filed another complaint No. 1401/1992 which was pending before the Industrial Court for same relief. The Labour Court then framed issues and on 7.7.2004 delivered the judgment in favour of the complainant, directing his reinstatement with full backwages, as mentioned above after finding that the employer had indulged in unfair labour practice falling under item 1(b,d and f) of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act. Industrial Court has in revision only set aside the grant of full backwages but maintained the rest of the judgment of Labour Court.

(3.) In this background I have heard Advocate Mrs. T.D. Khade, for petitioner / employer and Advocate Shri P.D. Meghe, for respondent / employee.