The court's decision established that when temporary or ad-hoc appointments are continued for a long period of time, the Court has to presume that there is a regular need for service on regular posts.

JUDGMENT :

1. Writ Petition No.8115 of 2005 is filed by Zilla Addhikshik, Krishi Khate, Sangli i.e. on behalf of the State Government of Maharashtra under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the judgment and order dated 11.01.2005 passed by the learned Industrial Court, Kolhapur in Complaint (ULP) No.172 of 1988. By the said judgment, the learned Industrial Court allowed the Complaint filed by the Respondents (original complainant) and directed the Petitioners to grant permanency benefits to the employees mentioned in Annexure-A to the Complaint except two persons w.e.f. 01.07.1988.

2. Briefly stated, Complaint Exhibit ‘U-1’ and amended Complaint Exhibit ‘U-21’ was filed by the registered Trade Union on behalf of the employees whose names were stated in Annexure-A to the Complaint who were members of the Respondent – Union. The employees worked under the control of Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and were engaged in process of preparing fruit plants, tree plants, vegetable plants, plantation activity of various varieties of plants viz. coconut, lemon, mango etc. taking care of mother trees, maintaining the plants, watering them etc. Petitioners used to sell these plants and earn profit on the same. The members of the Union were engaged to work on 30 acres piece of land situated at village Kupwad, Taluka – Miraj, District – Sangli for the aforesaid activity. Apart from the members of the Respondent – Union whose names were appended in Annexure-A to the original Complaint, Petitioners also engaged permanent employees for the same work / activity who were duly paid all benefits of permanency. However, members of the Respondent – Union whose names are appended in Annexure-A to the original Complaint were continued to be engaged by the Petitioners as temporary employees for years together, year after year, without giving them the benefit of permanency namely pay-scale, dearness allowance, leave facility, allowances etc. Respondent – Union therefore filed the original Complaint alleging unfair labour practice within the meaning of Item Nos. 5, 6, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short “MRTU and PULP Act”).

2.1. Petitioners in their written statement before the learned Industrial Court filed below Exhibit ‘C-20’ took up the defence that the Petitioners were not an ‘industry’ and as such provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short “ID Act”) would not apply to the original Complaint filed by the Respondent – Union.

2.2. It was contended that members of Respondent – Union whose cause was espoused in the Complaint were appointed on daily wages as no permanent work was available to be given to them. It was contended that work available with Petitioners relating to plantation was seasonal work and therefore it was not necessary for the Petitioners to engage employees on permanent basis. It was denied by Petitioners that the work undertaken by the temporary employees was equivalent to the work done by its permanent employees. It was contended that plantation work was skilled work undertaken by its permanent employees and only for the purpose of additional miscellaneous maintenance work i.e. watering of plants, digging of land, cutting of plants etc. which was of unskilled nature the temporary employees were appointed to work. It was contended that Petitioners’ establishment at Kupwad was a nursery. That it was engaged in making graft of various fruit plants which were preserved and such nature of work was not perennial. It was contended that merely because the temporary employees were engaged by the Petitioners for a long time year after year on temporary basis they cannot seek entitlement to permanency in services. It was contended by Petitioners that the activity of Petitioners at Kupwad nursery was not to earn profit from the sale of plants, rather its intention was to sell plants at low costs and spread th