STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PANDURANG SITARAM JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Letters Patent appeals involved a common question of fact and Law and hence the Appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Few facts that are relevant for adjudication of the issues are narrated hereinbelow. The appellant in all these appeals is the State of Maharashtra, through The Dairy Manager, Government Milk Scheme, Chiplun who appointed the respondents herein as daily wagers in the establishment of the dairy on payment of Rs. 81.29 Ps. per day. The respondents daily wagers have been in service of the appellant for a longer period running between 12 to 20 years. As the respondents were not granted permanency in service, they filed a complaint before the Industrial Court under Item 5, 6 and 9 of Scheduled IV of the M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act 1971. It was contended before the Industrial Court that the daily wagers were not granted permanency with an object to deprive them of the benefits of permanencny which is an unfair labour practice. It was also contended that the daily wage employees are entitled to permanency on account of they having put in 240 days of service in the preceeding year. The appellants herein opposed the claim by filing a written statement. The appellant State averred in the written statement that there do not exist sanctioned vacant posts for grant of permanency to the daily wagers. It is specifically averred that only if sanctioned posts exist, then and then alone request for permanency could be considered and in the absence of sanctioned vacant posts, it is impermissible to direct conferment of status of, permanency on the daily wagers. Completion of 240 days by itself would not entitled the daily wagers to claim permanency. It is also pleaded by the appellant that the daily wagers are not entitled to permanency and that the appellant, has not committed any unfair labour practice.

(3.) The Industrial Court has on appreciation of facts recorded a finding that there does not exist sanctioned vacant posts. However it observed that: