THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. MISS V.D. SAPRE AND SHRI V.P. PATIL, PRESIDING OFFICER, IIND LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision is preferred by the Applicant original Respondent in complaint ULP No. 289/87, against the order passed by the Presiding Officer of IInd Labour Court. Thane below interim relief application Exh, U. 2 on 17th November, 1989. The Complainant Miss Vasudha Dattatray Sapre has filed said complaint alleging unfair labour practice by the Respondent under item No. 1 clauses (a), (b), (d), (f), and item 6 of schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. It is her case that she was appointed as steno -typist in the office of Respondent No. 1 at Civil Construction division No. II, Uran on 22nd February, 1984 vide appointment letter dated 7th February, 1984. The said appointment was for the period of six months. Thereafter complainant was transferred to Civil construction division No. II at other office of Project Manager, Car Turbine project on 9th April, 1984. Miss E.V. Achamma, Steno -Typist was working in said office. She was transferred in lieu of the complainant to the office of Executive Engineer, Civil Construction division No. 1 Panvel. Miss. Achamma had joined service with Respondent No. 1 on 1st March, 1984.

(2.) HER service was continued in view of office letter dated 30th March 1984 and 12th April 1985. She was also awarded three increments during the period of her service. The provident fund amount was deducted from her wages. She was also granted leave like confirmed employees. She was also medically examined after her appointment. On 13th July 1987 she was issued retrenchment letter by the Respondent. Her service was hurriedly terminated. Miss. Achamma who was junior to her in the employment was not retrenched. The seniority was not considered at the time of said retrenchment. The Complainant, has, therefore, filed this complaint alleging the unfair labour practice.

(3.) THE Respondent has filed written statement at Exh. C.3 denying all the allegations. It is stated that Maharashtra State electricity Board is statutory body constituted by the Government of Maharashtra under section 5 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948. There are own service rules and regulations. Known as Maharashtra Stale Electricity Board employees service regulations. The recruitment to the vacancies are made from the candidate who were sent by the Employment Exchange and by following procedure. They have to pass written test, then successful candidates are called for interview by selection committee and if they found eligible in all respect, they are selected. There are some reservations for S.C. S.T., DT & NT. which are also to be notified by the Respondent. In this case 20 applications were received, but there was not a single application from SO., ST. & DT NT. Again notice was published, the names of 18 candidates recommended by the Social Welfare department. The Complainant was selected by the selection committee as she was not fulfilling the requisite conditions of eligibility. So the committee recommended relaxation for the experience, she was appointed on purely temporary basis for the period of six months on 7th February, 1984 by letter dated 30th August 1984. The period was extended for six months and again extended until further orders by letter dated 12th April, 1984.