The court determined that prolonged tenure contracts for employees performing roles of regular workers constitute unfair labor practice, justifying their regularization as permanent employees under applicable labor laws.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition had been filed challenging the award dated 21.01.2022 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court & EPF Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, in I.D.No.11 of 2016 and to direct the respondent management to regularise the petitioners services as permanent employees of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (in short “ONGC Ltd.”) and other benefits of salary allowances and other allowances, concessions and to pay back benefits and unpaid allowances with interest at the rate of 12% within one month and career progression and promotions from the date of appointment in the ONGC Ltd. as per ONGC's Modified Regulations and Promotion Regulations (in short “MR and PR”) 1980.

2. The dispute is in respect of 21 workers. The Union represents the workmen, who were employed as Field Operators on tenure basis by the ONGC Ltd., Cauvery Asset at Karaikal. The dispute is raised by the workmen seeking regularisation of their services. On reference by the Government, the dispute was heard by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court & EPF Appellate Tribunal, Chennai and the Labour Court denied the relief to the petitioners.

3. Essential facts of the case :

The petitioners were originally engaged on a tenure basis for the post of Field Operators for 4 years in three batches in the years 2008, 2009 and 2013, respectively. At the expiry of first 4 years, their tenure was extended for a further period of 4 years and thereafter also, they have been re-engaged for every four years till 30.07.2024. The petitioners claimed regularisation and that is the origin of this industrial dispute. By virtue of an interim order passed by this Court, the petitioners continued to be in service. So far as the tenure appointment and the periodical extension is concerned, that is not in dispute and that has been recorded by the Labour Court also.

4. The Labour Court answered the reference (i) and (ii) in favour of the Union. The Labour Court deals with Ex.M7, which is a letter dated 15.04.2013, given by the GM, Head Corporate-R&P, Tel Bhawan, Dehradun, that the competent authority has approved granting relaxation of age to the extent of services rendered by the employees as Rigman on drilling rigs of ONGC, for the purpose of applying for the regular posts in drilling discipline as Assistant Rigman. Accordingly, the petitioners, by making use of the age relaxation given vide Ex.M7, have availed their opportunity for applying to the regular posts and thereafter, they have been permitted to write the written examination.

5. The Labour Court further observed that the petitioners have been engaged on ad hoc basis and their services have been engaged and re-engaged on tenure basis. It is further submitted that they have been allowed to apply as departmental candidates and they were allowed to appear for written examination for the purpose of regularisation of their services in regular post on that basis. So, those candidates who were found successful in the written examination and who had satisfied all the eligible criteria in respect of the required posts, have been regularised in regular posts in the respondent Corporation and hence, those employees who were not successful in that exercise, cannot claim that they have suffered unfair labour practice. On the above observation, the Labour Court held that there is no unfair labour pract