CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS Vs. SHRI GHANSHYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this petition is to the judgment and order dated 16-1-2007 delivered by the Industrial Court at Bhandara in Complaint (ULPA) No.302 of 2004. The Industrial Court has declared that the employer was engaged in unfair labour practices under Items 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 ("MRTU & PULP Act") by not regularizing the service of the complainants with effect from 1-12-2004. The complainants are granted continuity in service and permanency with effect from 1-12-2004 and payment of difference of wages.

(2.) None appears for the respondent-complainants. I have heard Ms K.R. Deshpande, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners. After going through the decision of the Industrial Court, there appears a clear finding that the case of the complainants is not covered by the Government Resolution dated 31-1-1996 granting regularization in service. There is no basis for holding that the employer was engaged in unfair labour practices, as contemplated under Items 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act. There is no finding on the existence of sanctioned posts. In fact, most of the findings recorded by the Industrial Court are against the complainants and in spite of that, the regularization is granted.

(3.) In view of the aforesaid position, the matter is required to be re-considered by the Industrial Court. The respondent- complainants are in service and they can be continued till the decision of the complaint afresh by the Industrial Court.