BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing /setting aside the award dated 30.04.2007 passed by learned Presiding officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patna in Reference case no. 47 of 2003/ 02C of 2004 by which and whereunder learned tribunal directed the petitioner to reinstate respondent no. 4 on the post of peon within two months from the date of publication of award but without back wages and furthermore, it was observed by learned Presiding officer in the impugned award that respondent no. 4 deserved to be regularized on the post of peon under the management of the petitioner with effect from 01.05.2001 .

(2.) The claim of the respondent no. 4 is that he was orally appointed on the post of peon by the petitioner on payment of daily wages at the rate of 36/- per day. After appointment, he worked at sub division 5th floor, Telephone Bhawan Patna-1 from 04.02.1999 to 30.04.2001 continuously. During the period of his work, headquarter of the petitioner asked for option from serving employees as to whether they wanted to continue their service in Government of India (erstwhile department of communication) or transfer in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. Respondent no. 4 exercised his option and his name was also forwarded to the headquarter along with other workers. Subsequently thereto, name of respondent no. 4 was forwarded to the headquarter along with other workers for regularization of services but all of a sudden, respondent no. 4 was stopped from working with effect from 01.05.2001 and his payment was also stopped. He made representations but all went in vain and thereafter, he raised industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Patna under the provision of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, Patna initiated conciliation proceeding but ultimately, the aforesaid conciliation proceeding ended in failure due to attitude of the management of BSNL. Thereafter, the Central Government made a reference to Industrial tribunal for adjudication of the dispute of the parties in following terms:-

(3.) Petitioner filed written statement stating therein that respondent no. 4 was never employed on any vacant post nor any appointment letter was given to him and, as a matter of fact, he was only engaged on purely temporary daily wages worker and whenever his services was needed, it was taken and payment was made to him on hand written receipts. Furthermore, respondent no. 4 was working on daily rated Mazdoor basis and his wages were paid as per guidelines of the government and, therefore, respondent no. 4 had got no right to claim for regularization of his service. Furthermore, it was pleaded that respondent no. 4 was never appointed through any examination test or interview on any regular or vacant post and he worked merely as a part time causal worker and, therefore, there was no need to issue written termination order to him. It was also pleaded that since no appointment letter had been issued to respondent no. 4 by the competent authority, question of issuance of disengagement letter to respondent no. 4 by the management was not at all necessary.