STATE OF M P Vs. GANGARAM PORWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the order dated 11.5.2001 passed by the Member Judge, Industrial Court, Madhya Pradesh, Indore in Appeal No. 153/ MPIR/2001 setting aside the order dated 28.3.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Ujjain in Case No. 121/92/Labour.

(2.) Briefly stated, as per the first respondent he was appointed by the petitioners in the year 1972 on the post of Chowkidar. According to him in the year 1975 he was asked to perform the work of time keeper for about 3 to 4 months. Thereafter again in the year 1983 and in 1991 he was asked to work as Time-Keeper. He alleged that in spite of taking work of Time-Keeper and paying salary of the said post the petitioners did not classify him on the post of Time-Keeper. In the circumstances he had to approach the Labour Court by filing an application under Section 31 (3) read with Sections 61 and 62 of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 ('Act' for short) seeking classification on the post of Time Keeper in view of clause 2 (vi) of the M.P. Industrial Employment (Standard Standing Orders) Rules, 1963 .('S.S.O.' for short).

(3.) The aforesaid application filed by the first respondent was contested by the petitioners stating therein that the first respondent was merely asked to work as Time-Keeper from time to time as per the need of the work. He was posted as Time-Keeper for some period to meet the additional burden of work due to 'Sinhasth Festival'. It was also stated that the minimum qualification for the post of Time-Keeper is passing of Higher Secondary with 'mathematics' subject whereas the first respondent has not passed Higher Secondary with the subject 'mathematics'. It is further stated that the first respondent is holding the permanent post of Chowkidar and as such cannot be classified to a higher post of Time Keeper.