Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 Supreme(SC) 230

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. GOPALA GOWDA, C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.
TAMILNADU TERMINATED FULL TIME TEMPORARY LIC EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - APPELLANT
Vs.
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. - RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6950 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.6951 OF 2009CIVIL APPEAL NO.6952 OF 2009, CIVIL APPEAL NO.6953 OF 2009, CIVIL APPEAL NO.6954 OF 2009, AND CIVIL APPEAL NO.6956 OF 2009
Decided on: 18-03-2015

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant: Mr. M.A. Chinnasamy, Adv., Mr. V. Senthil Kumar, Adv., Ms. Asha Jain Madan, Adv., Mr. S. Nandakumar, Adv., Mr. P. Vasu, Adv., Mr. M. Soundarasaran Kumar, Adv., Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, Adv., Mr. B.K. Pal, Adv., Ms. Kusum Chaudhary, Adv., Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, Adv.
For Respondents: Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINT
Workmen working on jobs of perennial nature are entitled to absorption on permanent sanctioned posts.
Terminating workmen after 85 days showing artificial breaks is unfair labour practice u/s 25T and amounts to penalty u/s 25U.

Headnote:(a) Labour law – Awards of Industrial Tribunals – Order in SLP permitting parties to implement their compromise without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the concerned workmen – SLP order not setting aside earlier awards – Dispute raised by workmen – CGIT overriding terms of compromise – Within jurisdiction. (Para 25)
       (b) Labour law – Writ petition and Industrial dispute – Order in SLP (C) Nos. 10393-10413 of 1992 arising out of a writ petition based on compromise – Scheme of regularisation of workmen artificially terminated at intervals of 85 days – Order without prejudicing right of workmen to raise industrial dispute – Industrial dispute raised – CGIT adjudicating the dispute – Scheme framed pursuant to SLP (C) Nos. 10393-10413 of 1992 cannot override CGIT award. (Para 26)
       Piara Singh; (1981) 1 SCC 315; (1976) 4 SCC 736 – Relied upon
       SLP (C) Nos. 10393-10413 of 1992; (2001) 2 Suppl. JT 143 – Referred
       (c) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 12, 18(3) and 19(6) – National Industrial Tribunal (NIT) awards – Not terminated by the parties – Continue to be in force – CGIT passing award on basis of the earlier NIT awards – No infirmity – SLP not setting the awards – Neither substituting terms and conditions of the awards – High Court erred in setting aside CGIT award. (Para 27)
       Industrial Dispoutes Act, 1947 – Section 2(ra) r/w entry Item No.10 of Schedule V – Workmen working on jobs of perennial nature – Artificially terminated every 85 days – Unfair labour practice prohibited by section 25T – Action of Corporation amounting to penalty u/s 25U. (Para 27, 28)
       (2010) 3 SCC 192; C.A. No. 346 of 2015 – Relied upon
       SLP No. 14906 of 1988; 1993 (1) LLJ 1030; (2006) 4 SCC 1; (2006) 9 SCC 623; (2002) 3 SCC 411; (2005) 8 SCC 51 – Referred
       Facts of the case:
       This case relates to the demand/industrial dispute of badli and part-time workmen of LIC claiming absorption.
       Two NITs and the CGIT have recommended absorption of such workmen. Even the Supreme Court had issued directions, on compromise between the parties.
       Dispute also related to interpretation of ‘absorption’ and the NITs opined that ‘absorption’ is not ‘recruitment’.
       Finding of the Court:
       Award passed by the CGIT in I.D. No. 27 of 1991 is legal and valid. It shall be restored and implemented by the Corporation by absorbing the concerned workmen in the permanent posts and if they have attained the age of superannuation, the Corporation will be liable to pay all consequential benefits including monetary benefits taking into consideration the pay scale and revised pay scale from time to time by the Corporation.
       Result: Appeals allowed.

JUDGMENT

V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.

This group of appeals has been filed by various appellant-Associations questioning the correctness of the common impugned judgment and order dated 21.03.2007 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 690 of 2004 along with batch matters by the Delhi High Court in dismissing the appeals of the appellant/concerned workmen by issuing certain directions contained at para 20(a) of the said impugned judgment in affirming the judgment and order of learned single Judge in allowing the Writ Petitions filed by the respondent-Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short “the Corporation”). The appellant-Associations have filed these appeals urging various relevant facts and legal contentions with a prayer to restore the Award dated 18.06.2001 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, New Delhi (for short “the CGIT”) in I.D. No.27 of 1991.

2. The facts of the case are stated here under for the purpose of appreciating the factual and rival legal contentions urged on behalf of the parties with a view to ascertain whether the appellants/concerned workmen are entitled to the relief as prayed for in these appeals:-

The concerned workmen are the members of the appellant-Associations, Federation of Employees Association, Workers Association and other concerned individual workmen who were working in the branches of the Corporation at various places in the country have raised the existing industrial dispute between the concerned workmen and the management of the Corporation regarding their absorption as regular and permanent service employees in their respective posts of the Corporation. The concerned workmen in all these appeals have been working as temporary, badli and part-time workmen claiming that they have been appointed by the management of the Corporation on daily wage basis against the leave vacancies and other vacancies of its employees in Class III and IV posts in various branch offices and Divisions of the Corporation. Their claim for regularisation were based on two Awards passed of the National Industrial Tribunal (for short ‘the NIT’)

(i) the Award passed by Justice R.D. Tulpule on 17.04.1986 with regard to absorption of similarly placed workmen by the Corporation who had been working on temporary/badli/part-time basis in Class III and IV category posts in their respective branches of the Corporation and (ii)the Award passed by Justice S.M. Jamdar dated 26.08.1988, in pursuant to the reference made by the Ministry of Labour, Government of India, under Section 36A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’), where the NIT clarified and affirmed the Award dated 17.04.1986 passed by Justice R.D. Tulpule.

The present dispute that arose between the concerned workmen and the Corporation was referred to the CGIT by the Ministry of Labour, Central Government, in exercise of its statutory power under Section 10(1)(d) read with Section 2A of the Act vide Order No. L-17011/107/90-IR-B(II) dated 04.03.1991 on the basis of the report of the Conciliation Officer for its adjudication on the following question :-

“Whether the action of the management of Life Insurance Corporation of India in not absorbing Badli/temporary and part time workmen employed in the establishment of LIC after 20.5.1985 is justified, if not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?”

3. The said industrial dispute has been raised by the Associations, Federation of workmen and concerned workmen in their individual capacity which was supported by the Unions and Associations of these workmen of the divisions and zones of the Corporation across India and workmen who have represented their case on individual basis. Apart from the said Unions, Associations, Federation of some of the workmen from Tamilnadu Terminated Full Time Temporary LIC Employees Association and E. Prabhawati and Ors. had also been impleaded as parties in the dispute before the CGIT. E. Prabhawati and Ors. were impleaded vide order dated 01.12.1993 and The Tamil Nadu T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

gpt-4

2015 Supreme(SC) 230

IMPORTANT POINTWorkmen working on jobs of perennial nature are entitled to absorption on permanent sanctioned posts. Terminating workmen after 85 days showing artificial breaks is unfair labour practice u/s 25T and amounts to penalty u/s 25U.

Cases Referred (8)

Judicial Analysis

IMPORTANT POINT
Workmen working on jobs of perennial nature are entitled to absorption on permanent sanctioned posts.
Terminating workmen after 85 days showing artificial breaks is unfair labour practice u/s 25T and amounts to penalty u/s 25U.