Workers employed directly by a Corporation are entitled to reinstatement upon illegal termination, regardless of contractor claims, emphasizing the need for timely justice in labor disputes.

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

1. Heard Ms. Cox, learned Advocate for Petitioner in Writ Petition No.2644 of 2020 and Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.10432 of 2023 and Mr. Apte, learned Senior Advocate for Petitioners – Thane Municipal Corporation in Writ Petition No.10432 of 2023 and Respondents in Writ Petition No.2644 of 2020.

2. This is a group of two cross Writ Petitions which challenge the Award dated 25.04.2019 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No.41 of 2005. Writ Petition No.2644 of 2020 is filed by Union representing and espousing the cause of 53 workmen whereas Writ Petition No.10432 of 2023 is filed by the Municipal Corporation to challenge the Award. The Award dated 25.04.2019 is appended at Exhibit ‘A’ – page No.23 of Writ Petition No.2644 of 2020.

3. Briefly stated, Corporation is running and maintaining the Municipal Corporation namely Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Hospital, Kalwa (for short ‘the said Hospital’). The said Hospital is attached to Rajiv Gandhi Medical College, Thane run by the Corporation. Petitioner – Corporation is a registered Trade Union and the concerned workmen who were its members employed in the Hospital as Sweepers, Aayas and Ward boys. It is the case of Corporation that the workmen were appointed and engaged by a Contractor appointed by the Corporation. Therefore when the workmen sought permanency in service, they were denied the same resulting in the Union filing Complaint (ULP) No.281 of 1995 in the Industrial Court at Thane under Section 28 of the MAHARASHTRA RECOGNITION OF TRADE UNIONS AND PREVENTION OF UNFAIR LABOUR PRACTICES ACT , 1971 (for short ‘MRTU & PULP Act’) seeking permanency in service for them. The Complaint was disposed of for want of jurisdiction on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the cases of M/s. Cipla Limited and Kalyani Steel at the then time. Union thereafter espoused the cause of workmen seeking their reinstatement with full backwages and continuity of service. The demand of the Union was admitted in conciliation. However, Conciliation Officer submitted his failure report dated 17.09.2004. The State Government by order dated 27.05.2005 referred the said demand for adjudication to the learned Industrial Tribunal.

3.1. According to the Union, the workmen were employed as Aayas, Ward Boys and Sweepers in the Hospital run by the Corporation on regular work on day to day basis and they were fully integrated with the activities of the Corporation and the Hospital. It is their case that despite they having been worked in the Hospital alongside permanent workers; they were denied status of permanency even though when they were doing the same amount of work. It is their case that there are 15 wards in the Hospital and work is assigned to workers in different wards and their work is supervised. It is their case that in the respective wards, the Ward Attendance Registers / Ward Work Registers depicted their name alongwith other permanent workers of the Corporation employed in the Hospital.

3.2. The Union pleaded that these workmen were in continuous service of the Corporation and had put in more than 240 days in each respective year for several years and the act of oral termination of these workmen without offering them any notice and retirement benefit as required under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 resultantly leading to the dispute between the parties.

4. Ms. Cox, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Petitioner in Writ Petition No.2644 of 2020 would submit that the learned Indus