R.A Mehta, J.:— This petition is directed against an award of the Labour Court, Rajkot whereby the workmen who have completed five years of service as on 1-1-1983 as per the seniority list Ex. 26 are ordered to be made permanent with effect from 1-1-1983 and those who have completed five years of service after 1-1-1983 are ordered to be made permanent with effect from the respective dates when they completed five years of service. The employer, being aggrieved by granting of this demand of permanency, has challenged this award.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Management has submitted that the Labour-Court has relied on the Government Resolutions Exs. 16 and 17 for making these workmen permanent. However, according to the petitioner-Management, those Circulars have been thoroughly misread and misapplied by the Labour Court.
3. According to the petitioner - Management, under those Circulars, the daily wagers who are working on nominal muster roll are to be brought to work charge establishment and it only provides that after minimum service of five years as daily rated workers on nominal muster roll, such persons will become eligible for being taken on work charge establishment.
4. Ex. 17 is the Government Resolution dated 4-7-1973. It recites that daily worker are taken on nominal muster roll and such workers are working since years and not getting any benefits of service and the question of treating such daily rated workers to work charge establishment was under consideration of the Government and after due consideration, the Government had decided that whenever the question of recruitment to the posts on work charge establishment arises, preference shall be given to the daily rated workers subject to certain conditions; such as seniority, at least five years' service, relaxation of requirement of coming through employment exchange, compliance with the recruitment rules providing for educational qualification, experience, as regards relaxation in age limit, etc. By Ex. 16, the Government Resolution dated 16-11-1973, a clarification was made to the effect if a workman has worked for a minimum 180 days in a calendar year, he will be considered to have completed one year of service. However, for reckoning five years daily rated service, average presence shall be of 240 days in a year for becoming eligible to be appointed on work charge establishment. These Government Resolutions which have been relied by the workmen and which have been relied by the Labour Court only go to show that the workmen on the nominal muster roll become eligible after five years of service for being taken on work charge establishment. These resolutions do not provide that at the end of five years of service as daily rated workers, they are to be made permanent. Status of permanency is far away from daily rated workmen on nominal muster roll. The resolutions relied by the workmen provide that such daily rated workmen on nominal muster roll would become eligible for being taken on work charge establishment. Therefore, relying on these two resolutions, the demand for permanency could not have been granted by the Labour Court.
5. The learned Counsel for workmen has submitted that the demand of permanency is also based on the permanent nature of work which these workmen have been doing for all these years. The Labour Court has only proceeded on the basis of two Government Resolutions Ex. 16 and 17 which provide for making eligible the daily rated workmen for being taken up on the work charge establishment and the Labour Court has gone into the question whether these workmen were entitled to be taken as work charge or temporary or regular or permanent workmen. The Labour Court has not gone into the question of these different stages from daily rated workmen on nominal muster roll to permanency. It would, therefore, be in the interest of justice to send the matter back to the Labour Court for fresh decision in accordance with law by setting aside the impugned award.
6. In the result, the petition succeeds and the rule is made absolute by quashing and setting aside the impugned award and remanding the matter back to the Labour Court, Rajkot, for a fresh decision on the industrial dispute referred in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made in this judgment. Since the demand was raised in 1982 and Reference was made in 1983, the Labour Court is directed to expedite the hearing and disposal of the Reference. (LCD No. 32 of 1983.)
7. Rule made absolute.
8. Matter remanded to Labour Court.
Comments