Workers employed beyond 240 days are entitled to compensation for unfair termination under the Industrial Disputes Act, despite being classified as casual laborers.

ORDER :

D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.

These Writ Petitions are connected and as such, are taken up and disposed of by this common order. Three sets of Industrial Disputes were disposed of by three common awards. Aggrieved by which, these Writ Petitions are filed.

2. I.D.No.89 of 2003 etc., were disposed of by the common award, dated 11.06.2009 rejecting the claim of the workmen. Aggrieved by the rejection of the claim in toto, 24 workmen filed W.P.No.1748 of 2010 and another workman filed W.P.No.24861 of 2013. The second set of Industrial Disputes in I.D.No.160 of 2004 etc., were disposed of by the common award, dated 01.11.2010. By the said award, the Labour Court, while declining the relief of reinstatement with back wages, ordered compensation by directing the management to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to each of the workman who worked for less than 100 days and a sum of Rs.35,000/- to each of the workman who worked for less than 200 days and a sum of Rs.50,000/- to each of the workman who worked more than 240 days. Aggrieved by the award of compensation, the management filed W.P.No.1497 of 2013. 16 of the workmen filed W.P.No.17963 of 2012 and 15 of the workmen filed W.P.No.26293 of 2013 against the said common award. The third set of Industrial Disputes in I.D.No.39 of 2003 etc., were also disposed of by yet another common award on the same day i.e., on 01.11.2010, where under also, compensation on the same terms was ordered by the Labour Court. Aggrieved by the same, the management filed W.P.No.1496 of 2013 while the workmen filed W.P.No.17964 of 2012. 3. The brief factual background, in which, these Writ Petitions arise is that the management namely, Tamil Nadu Industrial Explosive Limited, is a public sector undertaking fully owned and sponsored by the Government of Tamil Nadu. It was manufacturing certain kinds of explosives. In the course of its activity, it is seen that a requirement arose to engage casual labourers. As per the rules of the Government of Tamil Nadu to engage even casual labourers, it is through Employment Exchange as laid down in G.O.Ms.No.790, dated 05.07.1971 reiterated vide G.O.Ms.No.44, dated 11.03.2015. The Employment Exchange was notified and the names were called for from the Employment Exchange. The casual workmen were specifically employed only for three months or six months. At the time of joining duty itself, it was made clear to the workmen and even an undertaking was signed by the workmen that they understood that their contract employment for three months and six months, will not confer any right whatsoever for them to claim any permanency or any other benefit and that they will be non-employed after the period of contract. Accordingly, these batches of workmen were employed on various dates in the year 2000-2001 and after the need ceased to exist, more specifically, when there was an incident of accident and during the audit, it was brought to the notice of the management that already, the Government of India has banned the employment of casual labourers in Explosive industries, all these workmen were discharged. Aggrieved by the same, the workmen raised a dispute. The conciliation failed and the Industrial Disputes were taken on file.

4. The Industrial Disputes were resisted by the management because none of the employees ever crossed 240 days. Section 2 5F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.D Act') does not apply to them. Therefore, no relief whatsoever can be claimed by them. Even if they were sponsored through Employment Exchange, that does not give any right to them as they were