The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Regulation 7 of the Pension Regulations, emphasizing the plain and unambiguous language of the regulation and adopting a beneficial rule of construction to fulfill the policy of the Regulation.

JUDGMENT :

1. The challenge in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to an order dated January 29, 2018 passed by the Industrial Court, Kolhapur dismissing the complaint of Unfair Labour Practice (hereafter ‘ULP’ for short) filed by the petitioner (hereafter ‘the employee’ for short).

2. The employee filed a complaint of ULP before the Industrial Court for a direction to the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation (hereafter ‘the Corporation’ for short) to consider the services rendered by the employee on daily wages for the purpose of benefit of pension. The employee was engaged as a daily wager with the Corporation in construction department w.e.f. 3rd August, 1987, where he worked continuously in such capacity till 16th June, 2004. The employee participated in the selection process for the post of ward-boy in the Health Department of the Corporation. The employee was recommended by the selection committee and thereafter appointed by an order dated 17th June, 2004, whereafter the employee became a permanent employee of the Corporation and was holding the post of ward boy till his retirement from the Health Department. The employee superannuated on May 31, 2011. The employee made a request that the service period as a daily wager with the Corporation be considered for computation of pensionary benefits in terms of ‘Pension Regulations of Kolhapur Municipal Corporation’ (for short ‘Pension Regulations’) of the Corporation. The Corporation framed the Pension Regulations under Section 465 (1)(h) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. The Industrial Court, for the reasons recorded in the impugned judgment and order, dismissed the complaint.

3. Shri Meelan Topkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the employee contended that the Industrial Court misconstrued Regulation 7 of the Pension Regulations. In his submission, the ingredients of Regulation 7 stand fulfilled in the present case. It is submitted that the Industrial Court while construing the provision, has added words in Regulation 7, which is impermissible. He submits that the employee was in the service of the Corporation, engaged as a daily wager for the period from 3rd August, 1987 till 16th June, 2004 continuously. Pursuant to the issuance of the advertisement for appointment to the post of a ward-boy, the employee was duly selected and appointed on the post of ward-boy. The employee was holding lien over such a post. In such circumstances, half of continuous of services rendered by the employee as a daily wager ought to have counted for the purpose of pension is the submission of learned counsel.

4. Mr. Sagar Mane, learned Counsel for the Respondent- Corporation, on the other hand supported the order passed by the Industrial Court. It is submitted by him that the purport of Regulation 7 is that the municipal employee should have worked previously on daily wages on the same post on which he is subsequently appointed to hold a lien permanently. He submits that, it is the experience of the particular post as a daily wager that would entitle the employee concerned to claim pensionary benefit in terms of Regulation 7. It is submitted that the employee was working in a different department altogether, on a different post, which had no concern with the post of ward boy in the health department of the Corporation over which he hold a permanent lien. He submits that, pursuant to the advertisement, the employee was appointed as a ward-boy in the Health Department and, therefore, the services rendered by the employee in the construction department on daily wages cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of granting pensionary benefit under Regulation 7, as he is holding a permanent lien on a different post altogether. Learned counsel urged that if such an interpretation placed by learned advocate for the employee is to be accepted, then daily wagers in any department of the Corporation will stake a claim for pensionary bene