SATISH KUMAR BHAMBANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties and examined the documents placed on the record.

(2.) THIS case pertains to a dispute of the workman, who was initially appointed on the post of Carpenter with effect from December 26, 1985 by Installation Officer, Programme Production Centre, Doordarshan Kendra, Jaipur (Respondent No. 3 ). The selection of the petitioner was against a vacancy which had arisen following the name of the petitioner being sponsored from the Employment Exchange, Jaipur. The contention of the petitioner is that notwithstanding that he was appointed as a daily-wager, he worked full-time at par with the regularly selected and permanent employees but his salary was not fixed in the regular pay-scale and instead the petitioner was paid Rs. 35/- per day only and there was violation of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. It has further been conducted that the services of the petitioner stood terminated with effect from November 1, 1986 by an oral order passed by non- petitioner No. 3. No retrenchment compensation was paid to the petitioner and no notice was served upon him nor any salary was paid in lieu of notice as required by Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act' ). It has further been contended that the petitioner, on the relevant date, had completed 240 days of his service for being treated as a permanent employee.

(3.) AGAINST the oral order of termination dated November 1, 1986, the petitioner had raised on industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer (ALC), Central, Jaipur. Thereafter the management agreed to retain the petitioner in continuous service and consequently the petitioner again resumed his duties at the Programme Production Centre (for short PPC) with effect from March 31, 1987.