2005 Supreme(SC) 396

2005(2) Supreme 477
Supreme Court of India
(From Karnataka High Court)
N. Santosh Hegde & S.B. Sinha, JJ.
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. —Appellants
versus
S.G. Kotturappa and Anr. —Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4868 of 1999
With
C.A.No. 4869 of 1999
Decided on 3-3-2005
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : K.R. Nagaraja, Ms. E.R. Sumathy, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Naveen R. Nath, Mrs. Lalit Mohini Bhat, Ms. Anitha Shenoy and Ms. Hetu Arora, Advocates.

Important point
The terms and conditions of employment of a Badli worker may have a statutory flavour but same would not mean that it was not otherwise contractual and workman so long remained a Badli worker, he did not enjoy a status and his services could be ­terminated upon compliance of contractual or statutory requirements.

Headnote:Industrial Disputes Act, 1947—Section 25F r/w 25B—Respondents were appointed as Badli conductors by appellant—Their services were terminated having been found to be not satisfactory—Labour Court found termination of service bad in law on premise that principles of natural justice were not complied with and directed reinstatement with full back wages—Award was confirmed by High Court—Appeal—Terms of appointment stated that workman appointed did not have any right merely because his services were so utilized on day to day basis—No case of respondent that they had completed 240 days of service during 12 months preceding such termination—Services were not protected by reason of any provisions of statute—Question as to what extent principles of natural justice was required to be complied with would depend upon fact situation obtaining in each case—Status of Badli could not be better than a probationer—Impugned judgment could not be sustained and were liable to be set aside.

       Held : The mode of appointment, therefore, postulates appointment in three tiers. The status of a temporary employee is higher than a Badli worker. The names of Badli workers are not to be included in the select list but in the wait list. A select list of selected candidates prepared by the selection authority is required to be equal to the number of existing vacancies plus vacancies that may arise over a period of one year from the date of publication as may be assessed by the Selection Authority and only in exceptional cases, the validity thereof can be extended for a period not exceeding six months. The select list or the wait list, as the case may be, therefore, does not have an indefinite life. A bare perusal of the memo dated 13.5.1982 in terms whereof the Respondent was appointed clearly states that he was appointed in the Corporation and did not have any right merely because his services were so utilized on day to day basis. The services of a Badli worker may be discontinued, if for any reason he is not found suitable for the job for which his services were utilized as Badli. A Badli worker is eligible for payment of wages only for the number of days his services are utilized. (Para 15)

       It is not a case where the Respondent has completed 240 days of service during the period of 12 months preceding such termination as contemplated under Section 25-F read with Section 25-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Badli workers, thus, did not acquire any legal right to continue in service. They were not even entitled to the protection under the Industrial Disputes Act nor the mandatory requirements of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes were required to be complied with before terminating his services, unless they complete 240 days service within a period of twelve months preceding the date of termination. (Para 17)

       The terms and conditions of employment of a Badli worker may have a statutory flavour but the same would not mean that it is not otherwise contractual. So long as a worker remains a Badli worker, he does not enjoy a status. His services are not protected by reason of any provisions of the statute. He does not hold a civil post. A dispute as regard purported wrongful termination of services can be raised only if such termination takes place in violation of the mandatory provisions of the statute governing the services. Services of a temporary employee or a badli worker can be terminated upon compliance of the contractual or statutory requirements. (Para 20)

       The question as to what extent, principles of natural justice are required to be complied with would depend upon the fact situation obtaining in each case. The principles of natural justice cannot be applied in vacuum. It cannot be put in any straight jacket formula. The principles of natural justice are furthermore not required to be complied with when it will lead to an empty formality. What is needed for the employer in a case of this nature is to apply the objective criteria for arriving at the subjective satisfaction. If the criterias required for arriving at an objective satisfaction stands fulfilled, the principles of natural justice may not have to be complied with, in view of the fact that the same stood complied with before imposing punishments upon the Respondents on each occasion and, thus, the Respondents, therefore, could not have improved their stand even if a further opportunity was given. [See Escorts Farms Ltd., Previously known as M/s Escorts Farms (Ramgarh) Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital, U.P. and Others [(2004) 4 SCC 281, Bar Council of India vs. High Court of Kerala (2004) 6 SCC 311, A. Umarani vs. Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Others (2004) 7 SCC 112] and ­Divisional Manager, Plantation Division, Andaman & Nicobar Islands vs. Munnu Barrick and Others (2005) 2 SCC 237]. (Para 24)