Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Writ Petition filed by Solapur Mahanagarpalika (Municipal Corporation) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Judgment and Order dated 17.04.2023 passed by the learned Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) No. 7 of 2014. The original complainants, 14 workers, had been working as Malaria Field Workers with the petitioner Corporation since 1997-98. They filed the complaint contending that they were employed through a due process of advertisement, selection, and interview, but were paid a meager salary of Rs. 5000/- per month initially, while permanent employees performing the same work were paid higher wages. The Industrial Court allowed the complaint, directing the petitioner to regularise the workers and pay them equal wages. The petitioner challenged this order on the ground that the workers were engaged on a temporary basis and that the Industrial Court exceeded its jurisdiction. The High Court, after hearing the petitioner's advocate, found no merit in the petition. It held that the workers had been continuously employed for over 25 years, performing the same duties as permanent employees, and that the petitioner's failure to regularise them and pay equal wages constituted an unfair labour practice under Item 6 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the Industrial Court's order.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Regularisation of Temporary Workers - Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act), Item 6 of Schedule IV - The Industrial Court found that the petitioner engaged in unfair labour practice by employing workers for decades without regularisation and paying them less than permanent employees for the same work. The court upheld the direction to regularise the workers and grant equal pay. (Paras 1-9) B) Industrial Law - Equal Pay for Equal Work - Malaria Field Workers - Constitution of India, Article 14 - Workers performing the same duties as permanent employees are entitled to equal wages. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that the workers were engaged on a temporary basis, noting that the nature of work was identical. (Paras 5-9) C) Industrial Law - Jurisdiction of Industrial Court - MRTU & PULP Act, 1971, Section 28 - The Industrial Court has jurisdiction to entertain complaints of unfair labour practices and grant appropriate relief, including regularisation and back wages. The High Court found no perversity in the Industrial Court's order. (Paras 2, 9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court erred in directing regularisation and equal pay for Malaria Field Workers who had worked for over 25 years on a temporary basis.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition, upholding the Industrial Court's order dated 17.04.2023. The court found no perversity in the Industrial Court's finding that the petitioner engaged in unfair labour practice and directed regularisation and equal pay.
Law Points
- Unfair Labour Practice
- Regularisation of Temporary Workers
- Equal Pay for Equal Work
- MRTU & PULP Act
- 1971
- Industrial Court Jurisdiction
