Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Premchand Ambadas Hanswar, was appointed as a daily wager on 18.9.1986 and discontinued on 6.10.1988. Subsequently, an advertisement was published for recruiting Kaksha Sevak, and the petitioner applied and faced an interview. A seniority list was prepared in 1993, placing the petitioner at serial No.1 in the OBC category, with three posts available. Some open category candidates were appointed on 22.4.1993. The petitioner claimed he was overlooked and filed Complaint (ULP) No.45/1995 seeking a declaration of unfair labour practice under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, along with prayers for reinstatement with back wages or alternative appointment as Kaksha Sevak with back wages. The Industrial Court, Amravati, by judgment dated 21.3.2017, rejected the complaint. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The High Court considered the undisputed facts and held that the petitioner was never appointed through regular selection; his name in the seniority list did not confer a right to appointment. The court found no error in the Industrial Court's decision and dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Seniority - Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - The petitioner, a daily wager, claimed unfair labour practice for not being appointed as Kaksha Sevak despite being senior in the OBC category. The Industrial Court rejected the complaint. The High Court held that the petitioner was never appointed through regular selection and his name in the seniority list did not confer a right to appointment. The petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court erred in rejecting the petitioner's complaint seeking correction in seniority list and appointment as Kaksha Sevak with back wages.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Court's judgment dated 21.3.2017.
Law Points
- Unfair labour practice
- Seniority
- Daily wager
- Regular appointment
- MRTU & PULP Act
- Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV
Case Details
2020 LawText (BOM) (01) 149
Writ Petition No.4856/2017
Shri S.G. Loney for petitioner, Shri A.M. Kadukar, A.G.P. for respondents
Premchand Ambadas Hanswar
The State of Maharashtra through the Deputy Director of Health Services, Akola and The Civil Surgeon, General Hospital, Amravati
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging Industrial Court's rejection of complaint seeking seniority correction and appointment.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to quash Industrial Court judgment and direct respondents to correct seniority and appoint him as Kaksha Sevak with back wages.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was aggrieved by the Industrial Court's rejection of his complaint alleging unfair labour practice.
Previous Decisions
Industrial Court, Amravati, by judgment dated 21.3.2017, rejected Complaint (ULP) No.3/2012 (originally No.45/1995).
Issues
Whether the Industrial Court erred in rejecting the complaint seeking seniority correction and appointment.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he was senior in the OBC category and was overlooked for appointment as Kaksha Sevak, constituting unfair labour practice. Respondents contended that the petitioner was never regularly appointed and his name in the seniority list did not confer a right to appointment.
Ratio Decidendi
A daily wager's name in a seniority list does not confer a right to appointment; the petitioner was never appointed through regular selection, and thus no unfair labour practice was established.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner was appointed as a daily wager on 18.9.1986.
He was discontinued on 6.10.1988.
A seniority list was prepared in 1993 and the petitioner was placed at serial No.1 in the O.B.C. category.
The petitioner claimed to have been overlooked and ignored by the respondent - Appointing Authority.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed Complaint (ULP) No.45/1995 before the Industrial Court, Amravati, which was later renumbered as Complaint (ULP) No.3/2012. The Industrial Court rejected the complaint on 21.3.2017. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition on 28.1.2020.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV
