Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bhagchand Garade, filed a writ petition challenging the judgment and order dated 16.7.2005 passed by the Industrial Court, Bhandara, dismissing his Complaint (ULP) No.85 of 2003 under Section 28 read with Items 5, 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971. The petitioner claimed that he worked as a temporary employee with the respondents (Government of Maharashtra, Irrigation Department) from 14.9.1989 to 16.10.1991, completing more than 240 days of continuous service. He contended that under Clause 4C of the Model Standing Orders, he was deemed permanent and his termination without retrenchment compensation was illegal. The Industrial Court dismissed the complaint, holding that the petitioner had not completed 240 days of continuous service. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the petitioner had indeed worked for more than 240 days, as the respondents failed to produce muster rolls to rebut his claim. The court held that the petitioner is deemed permanent under Clause 4C and his termination without notice or compensation is illegal. The writ petition was allowed, the Industrial Court's order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to treat the petitioner as permanent and pay retrenchment compensation or reinstate him.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Deemed Permanent Status - Clause 4C of Model Standing Orders - Petitioner completed 240 days continuous service from 14.9.1989 to 16.10.1991 - Held that the petitioner is deemed permanent under Clause 4C and his termination without notice or retrenchment compensation is illegal - Industrial Court erred in dismissing complaint (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, having completed more than 240 days of continuous service, is entitled to be deemed permanent under Clause 4C of the Model Standing Orders, and whether his termination without retrenchment compensation is illegal.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 16.7.2005 of Industrial Court, Bhandara quashed and set aside. Respondents directed to treat petitioner as permanent employee and pay retrenchment compensation or reinstate him.
Law Points
- Temporary employee completing 240 days of continuous service deemed permanent under Clause 4C of Model Standing Orders
- termination without retrenchment compensation illegal
- Industrial Court erred in dismissing complaint under MRTU and PULP Act
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (07) 40
Writ Petition No.4154 of 2006
Shri M.P. Jaiswal for petitioner, Mrs. Rashi Deshpande AGP for respondents
Bhagchand s/o Kapurchand Garade
Government of Maharashtra, Superintending Engineer Irrigation Department, Executive Division (Local Sector)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging Industrial Court order dismissing complaint under MRTU and PULP Act for unfair labour practice
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought declaration of deemed permanent status and compensation for illegal termination
Filing Reason
Petitioner claimed he completed 240 days continuous service and was terminated without retrenchment compensation
Previous Decisions
Industrial Court, Bhandara dismissed Complaint (ULP) No.85 of 2003 on 16.7.2005
Issues
Whether the petitioner completed 240 days of continuous service and is deemed permanent under Clause 4C of Model Standing Orders
Whether the termination of the petitioner without retrenchment compensation is illegal
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued he worked from 14.9.1989 to 16.10.1991, completing more than 240 days, and is deemed permanent under Clause 4C
Respondents failed to produce muster rolls to rebut petitioner's claim of continuous service
Ratio Decidendi
A temporary employee who completes 240 days of continuous service is deemed permanent under Clause 4C of the Model Standing Orders, and termination without retrenchment compensation is illegal. The burden to rebut the claim of continuous service lies on the employer, and failure to produce muster rolls results in acceptance of the employee's claim.
Judgment Excerpts
The claim of the petitioner/complainant was that from 14.9.1989 to 16.10.1991 he had completed more than 240 days continuous service and hence, as per the provisions of Clause 4C of the Model Standing Orders, he is deemed to be permanent.
The Industrial Court has committed an error in holding that the petitioner has not completed 240 days of continuous service.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed Complaint (ULP) No.85 of 2003 before Industrial Court, Bhandara under Section 28 read with Items 5, 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU and PULP Act, 1971. Industrial Court dismissed complaint on 16.7.2005. Petitioner filed Writ Petition No.4154 of 2006 before Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench challenging the dismissal.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Section 28, Schedule IV Items 5, 6, 9
