THE MANAGEMENT OF JHARKHAND STATE Vs. THE WORKMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent - Union represented through its General Secretary.

(2.) The following reference was made to the learned Labour Court, Ranchi by notification dated 08th September, 2009 issued by the Department of Labour, Employment and Training, Government of Jharkhand (Annexure-1) :-

(3.) Pursuant thereto Reference Case No. 10 of 2009 was registered before the learned Labour Court, Ranchi. Workmen filed their written statement which is at Annexure-2 and made the following assertion. That 09 workmen were temporary while 34 were permanent in nature. Irrespective of the fact whether one was permanent or temporary, wages for un-skilled workmen were paid to them, though they were entitled to salary and other benefits of equivalent to a 4th grade employee. 34 such workmen made a claim for being declared permanent and for grant of benefits equivalent that of a 4th grade employee while 09 such workmen sought permanence from the date they had completed 240 days in a calender year. The management also filed their written statement which is at Annexure- Apart from raising plea of maintainability of the reference, they contended that workmen engaged on casual basis, cannot be granted permanent status in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka and others v. Uma Devi and others, reported in AIR 2006 SC 1806. The number of workmen referred to in the notification were also disputed on the part of the management. According to them, there are no adhoc employee appointed under the management, 7 persons were engaged as casual worker in the year 2004-05 to meet the requirements of the work related to "Chauri Project" whose names were indicated therein. In respect of 34 workmen covered under item no. 2, they took the stand that they were engaged prior to those who were engaged in respect of item no. 1. In fact, only 26 workmen were still working on daily wages basis. They were, in fact, engaged by the erstwhile organization BISCOLAMPF prior to the formation of Jharkhand whose names were also indicated thereunder. According to them, no advertisement were issued before their engagement. All the workmen were being paid minimum wages as per government notification. Further they contended that the engagement is seasonal in character as work is not available for the whole year. Till 31.02008 the organization had sustained a loss of Rs. 5.14 Crores. Payment of wages for the whole year has entailed severe economic burden. They therefore, refuted the claim of workmen as unjustified and unlawful inter alia on the aforesaid grounds. Five workmen deposed during the proceedings of the reference case while management produced two witnesses.