Back
1999 Supreme(MP) 1119
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
G.K. Prasad, J.
MINERAL EXPLORATION CORPORATION LTD. AND ANOTHER - Appellant
Vs.
MINERAL EXPLORATION CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' UNION AND OTHERS - Respondent
Writ Petition No's. 1981 and 5423 of 1998
Decided on : 26-02-1999
Regularisation of service of temporary employees working in projects cannot be granted as a matter of course.
Headnote:
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT - REGULARISATION OF SERVICE - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES - APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS - JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL - VALIDITY OF REFERENCE - INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE - EXISTENCE OF - PRESUMPTION - REGULARISATION OF SERVICE - CONDITIONS - APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS - OBLIGATION OF THE EMPLOYER - SOCIAL OBLIGATION - FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT - RELEVANCE - REGULARISATION OF SERVICE - PROJECT EMPLOYEES - PERMISSIBILITY - TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT - NATURE OF - CONTINUANCE OF DAILY WAGES FOR LONG - PRESUMPTION OF PERMANENT NATURE OF WORK - APPLICABILITY - PROJECT EMPLOYEES - EXCEPTION.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Mineral Exploration Corporation Limited (MECL), challenged the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, which directed the appointment of 64 persons on compassionate grounds and regularisation of 2145 temporary employees. The Union, Mineral Exploration Corporation Employees' Union, filed a writ petition seeking modification of the award and regularisation of the services of the workmen with effect from January 7, 1993, and payment of regular pay scales from the said date.
Finding of the Court:
1. The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction in straightaway directing for appointment of 64 persons on compassionate ground without ascertaining the capacity of the employer to accommodate such persons. 2. The Tribunal erred in law in giving the impugned award directing the Corporation to regularise the service of 2145 employees working in projects.
Issues: 1. Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to direct the appointment of 64 persons on compassionate grounds without ascertaining the capacity of the employer to accommodate such persons? 2. Whether the Tribunal erred in law in directing the Corporation to regularise the service of 2145 employees working in projects?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The Tribunal, while handing over the award, did not refer to any decision of the employer providing for appointment on compassionate ground. The Tribunal's direction for appointment of 64 persons straightaway on compassionate ground was not sustainable. 2. Regularisation of service of a temporary employee engaged on daily wages is not a normal mode of recruitment, but an exception to enable the employer to regularise the service of temporary daily-waged employees. The Tribunal did not record any finding that the work performed by the employees who were directed to be regularised by the impugned award was of a permanent nature or was likely to continue. The direction for regularisation of service of employees working in projects could not be granted.
Final Decision: The writ petition (W.P. No. 1981 of 1998) was allowed, and the impugned award of the Tribunal was set aside. Consequently, the other writ petition (W.P. No. 5423/1998) was dismissed.
ORDER :
G.K. Prasad, J.
1. In Writ Petition No. 1981 of 1998 filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner i.e., Mineral Exploration Corporation Limited prays for quashing of the award dated March 24, 1998 (Annexure P-2) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur whereby it directed for appointment of 64 persons on compassionate ground and further directed for treating 2145 temporary employees as permanent employees by issuance of the writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction. In W.P.No. 5423/1998, petitioner, Mineral Exploration Corporation Employees Union prays for modification of the aforesaid award and seek direction that the services of the workmen be regularised with effect from January 7, 1993 and they be paid regular pay scales from the said date. Both the writ petitions are being disposed off by this common order.
2. Facts necessary for the decision of the present writ petitions as pleaded in W.P. No. 1981/1998 are that the Government of India by its order dated January 7, 1993 referred the following dispute for adjudication by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal:
(i) Whether the action of the Management of Mineral Exploration Corporation Ltd., Nagpur in not regularising the services of Sri A.K. Janson and 2144 others (As per Annexure 'A' attached) and depriving them from all fringe benefits like permanent workmen is justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to and from what date?
(ii) Whether the action of the management of MECL, Nagpur is not providing employment to Smt. Surya Gayee and 63 others (as per Annexure 'B' attached) as the legal heirs dependents of deceased employees on compassionate grounds is justified? if not, to what relief are they entitled to and from what date?
3. Petitioner Mineral Exploration Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) is a Government company registered under the Companies Act. Its aims and objects are exploration of minerals for and on behalf of the Government of India and its undertakings. After the minerals are explored by the Corporation, mining operation is conducted either by the State Government or by the Central Government or its undertakings. Work of the Corporation is only to explore and assess the location, quantity and quality of the minerals.
4. According to respondent No. 1, i.e. Mineral Exploration Corporation Employees' Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union) 90% work of the Corporation is of permanent nature and for that regular employees ought to have been recruited, but the Corporation gives permanent employment only to 40% workmen and rest of the work is taken from temporary workmen. Accordingly the stand of the Union is that on account of the aforesaid policy, temporary employees get less wages and they further do not get leave, loan, advance and conveyance allowances or promotion. Stand of the Union further is that the employer pays different emoluments for the same work to various employees who perform same function. Further stand of the Union is that in the year 1989-1990 approximately 8,900 workmen were employed and in the last 18 years their number is about 5,800. According to the Union workmen who have put in work from two years to ten years have been kept as temporary employees by the employer. It has been further averred by the Union that whenever the employer undertakes new project, it starts the same with the employees of the old project. It has been further averred that temporary employees are transferred from one place to another by order of the employer. According to the Union all the projects of the employer is completed within a period of six years, still there are a large number of temporary employees who are working in the Corporation for more than ten years.
5. According to the Union there are bipartite committees of the workmen and the Management at corporate level, area level and project level and in the year 1985 the committee
