Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Municipal Council of Kalamb, filed three writ petitions challenging identical judgments dated 22/08/2017 passed by the Industrial Court, Latur. The Industrial Court had partly allowed complaints filed by the respondent workers under Section 28(1) read with Items 5, 6, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971. The complaints alleged that the Municipal Council had engaged in unfair labour practices by not regularizing the workers despite their completion of 240 days of continuous service. The Industrial Court directed the Municipal Council to send complete proposals for regularization of the workers to the competent authority within two months from the date of the order, with effect from the completion of 240 days from their respective initial appointments. The High Court noted that the hearing had taken place on multiple dates and that one of the writ petitions (WP No. 14625/2017) had abated due to the death of the sole respondent. The High Court observed that the Industrial Court's findings were based on evidence and that the workers had indeed completed 240 days of service. The court found no perversity or error of law in the Industrial Court's order. Consequently, the High Court dismissed all three writ petitions, upholding the Industrial Court's directions. The court also noted that the petitioner's advocate had prepared a chart of dates of joining and periods of work, but this did not alter the conclusion. The judgment was delivered by Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge on 17th July 2019.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Regularization - Section 28(1) read with Items 5, 6, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - The Industrial Court partly allowed complaints of workers who had completed 240 days of service, directing the Municipal Council to send proposals for their permanency/regularization. The High Court upheld the Industrial Court's findings, noting that the workers had completed 240 days and the employer had engaged in unfair labour practices by not regularizing them. (Paras 1-3)
B) Industrial Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Scope of Interference - The High Court, in writ jurisdiction, declined to interfere with the Industrial Court's order as the findings were based on evidence and no perversity was shown. The petitions were dismissed. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court was justified in directing the Municipal Council to send proposals for regularization of workers who had completed 240 days of service, and whether such direction constitutes an unfair labour practice under the MRTU and PULP Act.
Final Decision
All three writ petitions are dismissed. The Industrial Court's order dated 22/08/2017 directing the Municipal Council to send proposals for regularization of the workers is upheld.
Law Points
- Unfair labour practice
- regularization
- permanency
- completion of 240 days
- MRTU and PULP Act
- Industrial Court jurisdiction
- writ petition dismissal
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (07) 20
Writ Petition No.14620 of 2017, Writ Petition No.14621 of 2017, Writ Petition No.14622 of 2017
Shri B. R. Sontakke Patil (for petitioner), Shri D. S. Kudle (for respondents), Shri S. P. Tiwari (AGP for State/Respondent)
The Mukhyadhikari Nagar Parishad Kalamb
Satish Baburao Jhadke and Others (in WP 14620/2017); Sumit S/o Rajkumar Gaikwad and Others (in WP 14621/2017); Nitin Arun Garad and Others (in WP 14622/2017)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions challenging Industrial Court's order directing regularization of workers.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (Municipal Council) sought to quash the Industrial Court's order directing it to send proposals for regularization of the respondent workers.
Filing Reason
The petitioner challenged the Industrial Court's order dated 22/08/2017 which partly allowed the workers' complaints and directed the Municipal Council to send proposals for their permanency/regularization.
Previous Decisions
The Industrial Court, Latur, delivered identical judgments on 22/08/2017 partly allowing the complaints and directing the Municipal Council to send proposals for regularization of the workers with effect from completion of 240 days from their respective initial appointments.
Issues
Whether the Industrial Court was justified in directing the Municipal Council to send proposals for regularization of workers who had completed 240 days of service.
Whether the Industrial Court's order suffers from any perversity or error of law warranting interference in writ jurisdiction.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner's advocate submitted that a chart of dates of joining and periods of work was prepared but needed to be typed out.
The respondents' advocate submitted that the Industrial Court's findings were based on evidence and should be upheld.
Ratio Decidendi
The Industrial Court's findings that the workers had completed 240 days of service and that the employer had engaged in unfair labour practices by not regularizing them were based on evidence and not perverse. Therefore, no interference in writ jurisdiction is warranted.
Judgment Excerpts
The Industrial Court has delivered identical judgments of the same date 22/08/2017 and has issued the following orders : ''1. The complaint is partly allowed. 2. The respondent is directed to send proposal complete in all respect regarding grant of permanency/regularization to the complainant w.e.f. completion of 240 days from respective initial appointment, to the competent authority within a period of two months from the date of instant order.''
On 05/07/2019, I had passed the following order : ''1. Shri Sontakke learned Advocate submits that in the Writ Petition wherein the sole respondent Shri Chandrasen Govardhan Kamble is involved, the petitions would become infructuous as Shri Kamble has passed away. ... 2. In view of the above, Writ Petition No. 14625/2017 stands abated.''
Procedural History
The respondent workers filed individual complaints under Section 28(1) read with Items 5, 6, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 before the Industrial Court, Latur. The Industrial Court partly allowed the complaints on 22/08/2017, directing the Municipal Council to send proposals for regularization. The Municipal Council challenged these orders by filing three writ petitions before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The writ petitions were heard on 04/07/2019, 05/07/2019, 11/07/2019, and finally on 17/07/2019, when they were dismissed. One related writ petition (WP No. 14625/2017) had abated due to the death of the sole respondent.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Section 28(1), Schedule IV Items 5, 6, 9, 10
