SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 81487

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
AMIT RAWAL, J
RAMAKRISHNAN K.R., SUJATHA. K., K. SARALAMMA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 24723 OF 2019| WP(C) NO. 24729 OF 2019| WP(C) NO. 24803 OF 2019| WP(C) NO. 24998 OF 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: N.SATHEESH, RAJESH MOHAN SINHA, K.JANARDHANA SHENOY
For the Respondents: P.VIJAYAKUMAR, TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN (SR.), K.M.ABDUL MAJEED, S.MANU - ASGI

Workers under no work no pay must be treated equally to regularized workers, ensuring consistent application of Tribunal awards.

Headnote:(A) Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 - Sections 10 and 18 - Writ petitions challenging implementation of an earlier award on regularization of ancillary labourers in Food Corporation of India - Previous awards established rights to regularization under Direct Payment System - Supreme Court rulings upheld benefits of the award for workers under the no work no pay scheme, granting them parity - Clarification sought after previous awards regarding indiscriminate regularization imposed inconsistently - (Paras 2, 9, 11, 14).

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The petitioners sought enforcement of specific rights as per industrial tribunal awards regarding regularization under direct payment - The respondent's failure to implement these rights contradicted established laws, necessitating judicial intervention to ensure equal treatment. (Paras 5, 6, 10).

Facts of the case:
All petitioners are Ancillary Labourers working under varying terms within the Food Corporation of India and sought regularization and benefits similar to other workers resulting from earlier Industrial Disputes.

Findings of Court:
The Food Corporation was instructed to regularize all eligible labourers under a single framework effective from the respective notification's date, ensuring parity among all workers.

Issues: Determining the applicability of industrial tribunal awards to workers under the 'no work no pay' system and enforcing the regularization of these workers uniformly.

Ratio Decidendi: Regularization processes must comply with established labour rights and statutes ensuring fair treatment across all categories of workers.

Result: Writ petitions allowed with directives for immediate compliance and equal treatment of all workers.

Table of Content
1. status and employment conditions of ancillary labourers under fci. (Para 2)
2. history of industrial disputes and tribunal awards. (Para 3 , 4)
3. conflicts over regularization and direct payment system application. (Para 5 , 6 , 12)
4. court's assessment of legal compliance and workers' rights. (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 13)
5. ruling on regularization for all ancillary labourers. (Para 8 , 11 , 14)

JUDGMENT

[WP(C) Nos.24723/2019, 24729/2019, 24803/2019, 24998/2019]

This order of mine shall dispose of four writ petitions bearing Nos. 24723 of 2019, 24998 of 2019, 24729 of 2019 and 24803 of 2019 as identical reliefs have been sought in all the cases.

2. All the petitioners are Ancillary Labourers (ALs) working in the service of the Food Corporation of India (FCI), in food storage depots at Mavelikkara - Alppuzha, Westhill - Kozhikode, Chalakkudy - Thrissur. Initially they entered into service under the contractor or the society as contract labourers and subsequently were inducted under “ no work no pay” (NWNP) with effect from different periods like 01.03.2014, 08.08.2019 and 07.07.2019. Contract workers engaged in various food storage depots raised Industrial Disputes (ID) seeking regularization of services in the Food Corporation of India bearing No.39/1992. An award was passed in the aforementioned ID in the year July, 1998 directing the Corporation to regularize and departmentalize the workers. In view of that, labourers of South India working through society/contractor and NWNP system in various depots of southern region also filed ID.No.55/1993 claiming identical relief. The same award was passed. For implementation of the award rendered in I.D.No.55/1993, O.P. bearing No.14360/1999 in respect of the depots of Mavelikkara, Chalakkudy and West-Hill was preferred. The Single Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 22.09.2009 directed the respondents to implement the award in I.D.No.55/1993. It is pertinent to mention here that in the mean time, the notification dated 12.11.2001 under Section 10 of the Contract and Labourer (Regulation and Abolition) Act was issued prohibiting the employment of the contract labourers.

3. The judgment of the Single bench was challenged before this Court in W.A.No.2491/2009 . Vide judgment dated 15.02.2010, the Division Bench upheld the finding of the Single Bench and extended the benefit of the award to all the workman who were employed in the establishment or part of the establishment taking into consideration the provisions of Section 18 (3) (d) of the Industrial Dispute Act.

4. The order of the Division Bench was challenged before Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.10530/2011 . It was dismissed vide judgment dated 20.08.2018.

5. Sri.Rajesh Mohan Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the induction of the workers working under the NWNP system in various food storage departments into direct payment system was not in tune with the award of the industrial Tribunal which was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court ordering regularization and departmentalization of the contract labourers including the laboures working under NWNP system. Divisional Manager of Food Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Alappuzha on verification of the records recommended the regularization of the labourers ie., all the petitioners into Direct Payment System (DPS) with effect from the date of the issue of the order as the cases of Ancillary Labourers was shown against the headquarter norms as they were working under NWNP scheme, thus sought indulgence of this Court for regularization and departmentalization irrespective of the fact that they were included in the NWNP system or not and declare that the petitioners to be included in the DPS system.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Food Corporation of India opposed the prayer and submitted that as per the records available in the office namely attendance register, EPF remittance slips, petitio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top