PUNE KRISHI UTPANNA BAJAR SAMITTEE vs BAJAR SAMITI ROJANDARI KAMGAR SANGHATANA - 2024-01-09

O R D E R

1. The petitioner- Pune Marketing Committee has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 15th January, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court in a Writ Petition1 wherein a challenge was laid to an order dated 05th December, 2018 passed by the Industrial Court, Pune, Maharashtra, in a complaint petition2 filed by the respondent, whereby the petitioner was restrained from transferring the services of members of the respondent-Union to the private labour contractors without their consent. The Industrial Court had also restrained the petitioner from prohibiting members of the respondent-Union from joining their duties till a decision is taken on their complaint.

2. Today, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner informs the Court that the complaint in question is still pending before the Industrial Court and by the impugned order, the High Court has upheld the order dated 05th December, 2018 passed by the Industrial Court, Pune.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the order passed by this Court on 02nd August, 2019, which is extracted here-in-below for ready reference:

“Exemption from filing Certified Copy of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. granted.

Mr B H Marlapalle, learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the challenge to the interim order is only to the extent that the petitioner has been directed not to prevent the entire group of daily-rated casual workers from attending to their duties. The submission of the learned Senior Counsel is that there are as many as 171 such workers and as a result of the interim direction of the Labour Court which has been affirmed by the High Court, the petitioner would be required to take every one of the said 171 daily-rated casual workers, irrespective of the need. It has been stated that the petitioner does not intend to recruit any other daily-rated workers apart from the workers drawn from the above group.

Delay condoned.

Issue notice, returnable in six weeks.

1 W.P. No. 14222/2018 Complaint ULP No. 256/2018 Dasti, in addition, is permitted.”

4. We are informed that the petitioner has abided by the statement made in the said order and out of a total of 171 daily-rated casual workers, 19 have already been absorbed on regular basis and 04 have superannuated, thus leaves the remaining 148 daily-rated casual workers, who are continuing to discharge their duties with the petitioner. It is further stated that an affidavit has been filed by the petitioner on 09th October, 2023 stating inter alia that as on 30th September, 2023, out of 343 sanctioned posts, 141 posts have fallen vacant on account of superannuation/untimely death/resignation by the employees. In view of the said development, recruitment has to be conducted for filling up the posts in terms of the directions issued by the High Court on 22nd April, 2019 in another Writ Petition3.

5. Learned counsel submits that members of the respondent – Union, would be afforded an opportunity of recruitment if they are found to be eligible and suitable in terms of the Guidelines dated 28th November, 2019, issued by the Director Marketing, Maharashtra State, Pune read with the Service rules framed by the petitioner. He adds that in any case, members of the respondent-Union will not be displaced or coerced into accepting employment through any contractor.

6. The petitioner is bound down by the statement made and recorded W.P. 6143 of 2018 hereinabove. Members of the respondent-Union shall continue to discharge their duties in terms of the impugned order till the vacancies are filled up in accordance with the relevant rules.

7. The Petition for Special leave to Appeal is disposed of on the above terms along with pending applications.

(POOJA SHARMA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.17 COURT NO.11 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19062/2019

(Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 15-01-2019 in WP No. 14222/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay)

PUNE KRISHI UTPANNA BAJAR SAMITTEE PETITIONER VERSUS BAJAR SAMITI ROJANDARI KAMGAR SANGHATANA RESPONDENT

(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.108983/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.108984/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 211087/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 210457/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 115403/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., , IA No. 210456/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 115402/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date : 09-01-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH For Petitioner(s) Mr. M. Y. Deshmukh, AOR Ms. Manjeet Kirpal, Adv.

Ms. Adviteeya Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Nitin A. Kulkarni, Adv.

Mr. Nitin S. Tambwekar, Adv.

Mr. Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

1. The petitioner- Pune Marketing Committee has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 15th January, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court in a Writ Petition4 wherein a challenge was laid to an order dated 05th December, 2018 W.P. No. 14222/2018 passed by the Industrial Court, Pune, Maharashtra, in a complaint petition5 filed by the respondent, whereby the petitioner was restrained from transferring the services of members of the respondent-Union to the private labour contractors without their consent. The Industrial Court had also restrained the petitioner from prohibiting members of the respondent-Union from joining their duties till a decision is taken on their complaint.

2. Today, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner informs the Court that the complaint in question is still pending before the Industrial Court and by the impugned order, the High Court has upheld the order dated 05th December, 2018 passed by the Industrial Court, Pune.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the order passed by this Court on 02nd August, 2019, which is extracted here-in-below for ready reference:

“Exemption from filing Certified Copy of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. granted.

Mr B H Marlapalle, learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the challenge to the interim order is only to the extent that the petitioner has been directed not to prevent the entire group of daily-rated casual workers from attending to their duties. The submission of the learned Senior Counsel is that there are as many as 171 such workers and as a result of the interim direction of the Labour Court which has been affirmed by the High Court, the petitioner would be required to take every one of the said 171 daily-rated casual workers, irrespective of the need. It has been stated that the petitioner does not intend to recruit any other daily-rated workers apart from the workers drawn from the above group.

Delay condoned.

Issue notice, returnable in six weeks.

Dasti, in addition, is permitted.”

4. We are informed that the petitioner has abided by the statement Complaint ULP No. 256/2018 made in the said order and out of a total of 171 daily-rated casual workers, 19 have already been absorbed on regular basis and 04 have superannuated, thus leaves the remaining 148 daily-rated casual workers, who are continuing to discharge their duties with the petitioner. It is further stated that an affidavit has been filed by the petitioner on 09th October, 2023 stating inter alia that as on 30th September, 2023, out of 343 sanctioned posts, 141 posts have fallen vacant on account of superannuation/untimely death/resignation by the employees. In view of the said development, recruitment has to be conducted for filling up the posts in terms of the directions issued by the High Court on 22nd April, 2019 in another Writ Petition6.

5. Learned counsel submits that members of the respondent – Union, would be afforded an opportunity of recruitment if they are found to be eligible and suitable in terms of the Guidelines dated 28th November, 2019, issued by the Director Marketing, Maharashtra State, Pune read with the Service rules framed by the petitioner. He adds that in any case, members of the respondent-Union will not be displaced or coerced into accepting employment through any contractor.

6. The petitioner is bound down by the statement made and recorded hereinabove. Members of the respondent-Union shall continue to discharge their duties in terms of the impugned order till the vacancies are filled up in W.P. 6143 of 2018 accordance with the relevant rules.

7. The Petition for Special leave to Appeal is disposed of on the above terms along with pending applications.

(POOJA SHARMA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)