JUDGMENT :

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.

1. Leave to correct the description of the Deputy Director, Health Services, Aurangabad by mentioning Latur in place of Aurangabad, in the first two writ petitions. Correction be carried out forthwith.

2. In the first two writ petitions (Nos. 4556/2003 and 4557/2003), the petitioners/ management are aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 01.08.2003 delivered by the Industrial Court by which, the ULP complaints filed by the respondents/four workers have been partly allowed and they have been granted permanency w.e.f. 01.04.1991 in view of they having completed 240 days in continuous employment with the petitioners. Further benefits, of pay scales available to the drivers and peons, have been granted and the difference of amounts is also directed to be paid.

3. This Court, vide order dated 07.12.2004, had stayed the criminal ULP proceedings filed by the respondents/workers under Section 48(1) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short "the MRTU and PULP Act"). By a detailed order dated 15.04.2005, interim relief in terms of prayer clause "C" was granted in both the petitions. Consequent upon the interim relief granted by this Court, it is informed that, these respondents/workers have been terminated from service only because they were temporary workers and the judgment of the Industrial Court was stayed.

4. I have heard the learned AGP for the petitioners/management and the learned advocate for the respondents/workers. I have perused the record available. These respondents/ workers were working from 1987-1989 onwards till they were disengaged on 13.12.2005.

5. The contention of the petitioners/management in the first two writ petitions is that these four workers were daily wagers and they were working under a project. Firstly, some of them were engaged as drivers or peons depending upon the work available. Secondly, they were aware that they were being engaged on daily wages and there was no assurance of permanency keeping in view that their deployment was on a project for eradication of leprosy. The learned AGP hastens to add that as things stand today in the State of Maharashtra, leprosy has been practically eradicated on account of the aggressive programmes aimed at preventing leprosy and the scheme has been brought to an end.

6. The learned advocate for the workers points out from the judgment delivered at the Principal Seat on 11.04.2018 in the matter of the State of Maharashtra and Another vs. Kishor N. Chemburkar and Others, Writ Petition No. 4561/2001, that the writ petitions filed by the State, as like these petitions filed in this Court, have been dismissed and the judgment of the Industrial Court that was impugned before the Principal Seat has been sustained. He further adds that the Special Leave Petition filed by the State Government before the Honourable Supreme Court has also been dismissed on 04.07.2019. He, therefore, prays for parity.

7. In the third and fourth writ petitions (Nos. 6796/2007 and 594/2008), only two workers, namely, Maijoddin Kazi and Manohar Gore, are aggrieved by the judgment of the Industrial Court dated 20.06.2007 by which, the revision ULP petitions filed by the management have been allowed and the judgment of the Labour Court dated 31.03.2007, partly allowing the ULP complaint filed by these workers for challenging their disengagement, has been quashed and set aside.

8. After this Court granted interim relief in favour of the management in the first two petitions, the management disengaged these workers in December, 2005 after they had continuously worked from 1987-88 till December, 2005. This led the workers to the Labour Court in ULP complaints for challenging their termination. It was brought on record that these workers were appointed in the health scheme as peons/drivers as the Multi Drug Therapy Programme and the National Leprosy Eradication Programme were undertaken by the State Government.