Back
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
T.Nandakumar Singh, J.
All Manipur Government Arts & Culture Department -Appellant
Versus
State of Manipur & Ors. -Resopndent
Writ Petition No. 1161 of 2005
Decided On : 14-09-2011
Trade Union Act, 1926 – Appointment of teachers - Contract of service - Members of petitioner Union had earlier approached this Court by filing writ petition being Civil Rule direction to State respondents to absorb their services in regular establishment - This Court passed interim orders respectively in directing respondents not to oust members of petitioner-Union from their services and also to pay their pay and allowances – Held, Either case equities have been created because of doings state itself therefore it should resolve it - One such method was adopted by High Court in individual petitions filed by teachers by directing Director of Education selection - Pursuance of it some teachers have been regularized - But substantial number still remain due to States going back on its agreement before Court by creating obstacles in implementation of order - Many them who have faced selection and have secured higher marks and are in zone of selection are being denied benefit because it is claimed that such regular-ization would be contrary to reservation policy of the State - Policy is challenge in another proceedings Court - Without entering into validity of he policy which according to petitioner results in cent per cent reservation we are opinion that such practice should be put an end to therefore following directions are necessary to be issued - Petition allowed
Heard Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Grace, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-union and Ms. Ch. Sundari, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.
2. The petitioner-Union is formed by casual/contract employees of the Arts & Culture Department, Govt. of Manipur and is registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926 and its registration No. is No.551 of 2002. The particulars of the members of the petitioner-Union are mentioned in Annexure- A/ 2 of the writ petition and it reads as follows:-
"List of members:
1. A. Devdash Sharma L.D.C.
2. S. Shanti Devi L.D.C.
3. B. Chandragupa Singh Grade - IV
4. K. Shakhi Devi, L.D.C.
5. T. Mema Devi Jr. Lecture,
6. Th. Shakuntala Devi, L.D.C.
7. H. Inakhul Meitei, Monument, Attd.
8. M. Gouzamang, Monument Attd.
9. Ch. Iboyai Singh, Monument Attd.
10. L.Herojit Singh L.D.C.
11. Kh. Sarojkanta Singh, L.D.C.
12. N. Pramodini Devi, L.D.C.
13. W.Thoibi Devi, L.D.C.
14. Ch.Upaj it Singh, Table Accompanist, ,
15. W. Nobin Singh, Jr. Lect.
16. H. Rajendro Singh, Asst. Repographist,
17. N. Chitra Devi, Asst. Chemist,
18. Th. Nilabati Devi, Preservation Asst.
19. P. Dhaneshwari Devi, L.D.C.
20. Th. Phalguni Devi, Texidermist/Lab. Asst
21. S. Girani Singh, Gallery Asst.
22. Th. Tarunibala Devi, Binder,
23. Th. Shanti Devi, C/A
24. Th.Bimola Devi, C/A
25. Ch. Ibempishak Devi, Tech. Asst.
26. R.K. Urmila Devi, Tech. Asst.
27. M. Kunjarani Devi, LDC
28. H. Leisimi, C/Attd.
29. Blow Mao, C/Attd.
30. Hariku, Grade-IV
31. Ngaihoiching, Grade - IV
32. M. Samarendro Singh, L.D.C.
33. W. Pritibala Devi, Library Asstt."
3. The members of the petitioner-Union had earlier approached this Court by filing writ petition being Civil Rule No. 148 of 1998 for a direction to the State respondents to absorb their services in the regular establishment. This Court passed interim orders dated 10.3.98 and 20.3.98 respectively in C.R. No.148 of 1998 directing the respondents not to oust the members of the petitioner-Union from their services and also to pay their pay and allowances. The said Civil Rule No. 148 of 1998 was finally disposed of by this Court by passing judgment and order dated 07.12.1998 directing the State respondents to prepare a scheme on rational basis taking into account of the length of services of the members of the petitioner-Union under the State respondents with the vacancy position of the related posts and also to make proper scrutiny about their eligibility for absorption to their respective posts and also their past services shall be taken into account for the purpose of their retirement benefits, other pensionary benefits and also for the purpose of absorption also.
4. The term of the contract services of the members of the petitioner-Union had been extended vide order of the Director of Arts & Culture Department, Govt. of Manipur dated 25.7.2000. Under subsequent orders of the Director of Arts & Culture Department, Govt. of Manipur, i.e. 6.01.2001 (Annexure-A/7), 25.8.2001 (Annexure-A/8), 26.3.2002 (Annexure-A/9) and 19.02.2004 (Annexure-A/l 0), the term of the services of the members of the petitioner-Union as casual/contract employees had been extended upto 31.10.2003. By the impugned order dated 30.8.2005, the term of the engagement of the members of the petitioner-Union and others as casual/contract employees had been extended from 02.11.2003 thereby making one day's break i.e. (01.11.2003) in the engagement of the members of the petitioner-Union and others as casual/contract employees. It is also stated that the members of the petitioner-Union are aggrieved by the said one day's break in extension of the term of the engagement of the members of the petitioner-Union as casual/contract employees of the Arts & Culture Department, Govt. of Manipur.
5. The respondents have filed their affidavit-in-opposition wherein it is stated that the members of the petitioner-Union, who are casual and contract employees have no right to claim for continuation i
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
