LAWS(JHAR)-2017-6-106

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO MANAGEMENT OF BLOCK-II AREA OF M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED, DHANBAD Vs. THEIR WORKMAN

Decided On June 22, 2017
Employers In Relation To Management Of Block-Ii Area Of M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad Appellant
V/S
Their Workman Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner. Respondent, though has appeared through his counsel, but no counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf. No one appears today either to represent him.

(2.) The workman Shri Ramagya Gour, a General Mazdoor, even as per term of reference, raised a claim for regularisation of his services on the post of Fitter. This was referred to the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal-1, Dhanbad vide order dated 20th November 1997 by the Ministry of Labour, Government of India and instituted as Reference No.193 of 1997. The workman through his written statement pleaded that he is a permanent workman working in Block-II Area of M/s BCCL who has been continuously and satisfactorily working as Fitter since 1988 which is revealed from perusal of the high recommendation of the concerned authority of Block-II Area Open Cast Project. He has been engaged in maintenance and repair works of Dozers, Dumpers and other heavy vehicles and documents served by the management were testimonies to that. However, he is being treated as General Mazdoor. He also referred to a letter dated 23rd January 1996 of the Management which discloses warning upon him for lapses on his part in course of his engagement as a Fitter. On failure of conciliation, the reference was raised. He accordingly prayed that an award be passed in his favour to regularise him as Fitter since 1988.

(3.) Contention of the management, as evident from their written statement and the submissions of the counsel representing them, is to the effect that the concerned workman was holding the substantive post of General Mazdoor in Category-I as per the cadre scheme. Under the ladder of promotion, a General Mazdoor is to be promoted as Helper in Category-II and Senior Helper in Category-III and then only can be promoted in Category-IV. A General Mazdoor in Category-I cannot be promoted as Fitter in Category-IV superseding the workmen senior to him in the lower cadres. There is no provision for regularisation under the cadre directly from General Mazdoor Category-1 to the post of Fitter in CategoryIV. The management had not issued any circular or rule permitting the local management to put any person according to their own choice on the post of Fitter from the post of General Mazdoor Category-I.