Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Chief Officer of Shirdi Municipal Council, challenged the judgment and order dated 07.08.2014 of the Industrial Court, Ahmednagar, which partly allowed Complaint ULP No. 116/2012 filed by Respondent No.2, Smt. Sangeeta Nandkumar Dalavi. The respondent is the widow of Nandkumar Vitthal Dalavi, who was employed with the petitioner council on daily wages and later granted permanency as a Cashier with effect from 01.07.1992. He died in service on 04.09.2006. On 27.09.2006, the respondent applied for compassionate appointment. The petitioner did not decide the application, leading the respondent to file the complaint in 2012 alleging unfair labour practices under Items 5, 9, and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act). The Industrial Court partly allowed the complaint, declaring that the petitioner had engaged in unfair labour practices and directing consideration of the application. The petitioner argued that there was no legal right to compassionate appointment and that the complaint was barred by delay. The High Court held that the Industrial Court had correctly condoned the delay as the cause of action was continuing due to the employer's inaction. The court further held that the failure to consider the application for over six years amounted to unfair labour practice. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Court's order.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Compassionate Appointment - Unfair Labour Practice - Items 5, 9, 10 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 - The widow of a deceased municipal employee sought compassionate appointment. The employer failed to consider her application for over six years. The Industrial Court held that such inaction amounted to unfair labour practice. The High Court upheld the finding, noting that the employer's failure to decide the application was arbitrary and unjust. (Paras 1-10) B) Industrial Law - Delay in Filing Complaint - Condonation of Delay - The complaint was filed in 2012, six years after the death of the employee in 2006. The Industrial Court condoned the delay. The High Court held that the delay was not fatal as the employer had not rejected the application but had kept it pending, and the cause of action was continuing. (Paras 5-8) C) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Items 5, 9, 10 of Schedule IV - The employer's failure to consider the application for compassionate appointment and to communicate any decision amounts to unfair labour practice under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The High Court affirmed the Industrial Court's declaration. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court erred in partly allowing the complaint for compassionate appointment despite the delay in filing the complaint and the absence of a legal right to compassionate appointment.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Court's judgment and order dated 07.08.2014. The petitioner was directed to consider the respondent's application for compassionate appointment in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Compassionate appointment
- Unfair labour practice
- Delay in filing complaint
- MRTU & PULP Act
- 1971
- Items 5
- 9
- 10 of Schedule IV
