Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Dhandapani, J
Metropolitan Transport Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Labour – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of writ proceedings by management against labor authority orders regarding permanency. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the principle of laches and the binding nature of industrial settlements regarding worker status. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court intervention to set aside orders granting retrospective permanency to employees due to unjustified delay. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER
These three petitions have been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 11.03.2024 passed by the 1st respondent herein, and to quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
2.The case of the petitioner in respective writ petitions is that the second respondent therein were initially engaged on a temporary basis as Reserve Crew Drivers and Reserve Crew Conductor on a stop-gap arrangement and were subsequently appointed as daily wage drivers and conductor in the year 1999. They were later granted regularisation with effect from 01.09.2005 pursuant to the 12(3) Settlement dated 31.08.2005. It is the further case of the petitioner that, in view of the Government ban order dated 05.07.2001, no fresh appointments or regularisations could be made during the currency of the ban period. After
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
