Madras High Court
E.Lakshmanan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 22 September, 2020
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
____________
W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE : 22.09.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P. NOS. 16188 & 19370 OF 2013
W.P. No. 16188 of 2013
1.E.Lakshmanan
2.K.Sivakumar
3.R.Krishnamoorthy
4.M.Saravanan
5.N.Suresh Babu
6.P.Arumugam
7.P.Venkatesan
8.M.Venkatesan
9.V.Anithkumar
10.P.Elumalai
11.V.Venkatesan
12.S.Suresh
13.M.Kamaraj
14.M.Murali
15.G.Dhasar
16.D.G.Rajan
17.S.Albert
18.R.Anandan
19.M.Dhanamoorthy
20.M.Krishnan
21.S.Senthilkumar
22.P.Anbu .. Petitioners
- Vs -
1.State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government
http://www.judis.nic.in1/11
____________
W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013
Cooperation, Food & Consumer
Protection Department
Fort St.George
Chennai – 600 009.
2.Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
rep. by its Chairman – cum – Managig Director
No.10, Thambusamy Road
Chennai – 600 010.
3.The Senior Regional Manager
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
Sidco Complex, Vengikkal
Tiruvannamalai District – 606 604.
4.The Assistant Engineer (Mechanical)
Modern Rice Mill,
TNCSC Ltd., Polur Taluk
Tiruvannamalai District. .. Respondents
W.P. No.19370 of 2013
1.The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
No.12, Thambusamy Salai
Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.
2.The Regional Manager,
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
Vengikkal, Tiruvannamalai.
3.The Assistant Engineer (Mechanical)
Modern Rice Mill
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
Polur Taluk
Tiruvannamalai District. .. Petitioners
- Vs -
http://www.judis.nic.in2/11
____________
W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013
1.E.Lakshmanan
2.K.Sivakumar
3.R.Krishnamoorthy
4.M.Saravanan
5.N.Suresh Babu
6.P.Arumugam
7.P.Venkatesan
8.M.Venkatesan
9.V.Anithkumar
10.P.Elumalai
11.V.Venkatesan
12.S.Suresh
13.M.Kamaraj
14.M.Murali
15.G.Dhasar
16.D.G.Rajan
17.S.Albert
18.R.Anandan
19.M.Dhanamoorthy
20.M.Krishnan
21.S.Senthilkumar
22.P.Anbu
23.The Deputy Director
Industrial Security & Health
Thiruvannamalai. .. Respondents
W.P. No.16188 of 2013 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents herein from in any
manner terminating the services of the petitioners, who are doing the work of
Helpers/Packers in the Modern Rice Mill, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District right from
the year 2001 till the implementation of the orders made in No.Aa/305/2013
dt.29.05.2013 passed by the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health/
Competent Authority under the T.N. Industrial Establishments (Conferment of
http://www.judis.nic.in3/11
____________
W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013
Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981.
W.P. No.19370 of 2013 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order made in
Case No. M / 305 / 2013 dated 29.05.2013 on the file of the 23 rd respondent/
Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health, Thiruvannamalai and quash the
same.
For Petitioners : M/s.K.Prem Kumar in WP 16188/2013
Mr.C.Munusamy, Spl. GP in WP 19370/2013
For Respondents : Ms.T.Girija, AGP for R-1
in W.P.No.16188 of 2013
Mr.C.Munusamy, Spl. GP for RR-2 to 4
in W.P.No.16188 of 2013
Mr.K.Prem Kumar for RR-1 to 22
in W.P.No.19370 of 2013
COMMON ORDER
Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions are interconnected, they are heard together and disposed of by way this common order.
2. It is the case of the petitioners in W.P.No.16188 of 2013/ respondents 1 to 22 in W.P.No.19370 of 2013 that they are Contract Labours/Helpers in Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Modern Rice Mill, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District and they are working from the year 2001 and they are dealing with the procurement of essential commodities and other products for and on behalf of http://www.judis.nic.in4/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013 Government of Tamil Nadu for distributing the same through Public Distribution System. It is further averred that in view of the continuous nature of works carried out by them, they made request for appointment as permanent employees of Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Modern Rice Mill, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District and also submitted their individual details to the Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) of the said Mill. Inspite of their request, as there was no progress in their appointment on permanent basis, they filed application under Section 3 of the T.N. Industrial Establishment (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981 on 22.09.2008. It is further averred that the Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited called for eligible persons from the District Employment Office, Tiruvannamalai District for appointment to the post of Helpers and Electricians. Aggrieved by the same, they filed W.P.No.12860 of 2012 before this Court. This Court vide order dated 15.11.2012 dismissed the said writ petition in view of the pendency of application under Section 3 of the T.N. Industrial Establishment (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981 (for short 'Permanent Status Act').
3. It is further averred by the petitioners/labourers that the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health/Competent Authority under the T.N. Industrial Establishment (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, http://www.judis.nic.in5/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013 1981 passed final orders on their application on 29.05.2013, holding that they are entitled to permanent status from the date of their respective completion of 480 days in two calender years. However, the authorities have not implemented the said order aggrieved by which the petitioners in W.P.No.16188 of 2013 filed the said writ petition. Aggrieved by the order dated 29.05.2013, the petitioners in W.P.No.19370 of 2013 filed the said writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.16188 of 2013 fairly admitted that though the petitioners/labourers are entitled to permanent status under the Contract Labour Act, under which Act they should have filed application, however, inadvertently they filed application under the Factories Act. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners/labourers that filing of petition under a wrong provision of law cannot be a ground to set aside the order of the Labour Court, as this Court, sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has much wider and inherent powers to set right the wrong by issuing appropriate directions. Therefore, this Court, in exercise of its inherent powers, may direct the respondent authorities to implement the order passed for conferment of permanent status to the petitioners.
http://www.judis.nic.in6/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013
5. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent authorities, while concurred with the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners/labourers that the application for permanent status has been filed wrongly under the Factories Act and it should have been filed under the Contract Labour Act, however, vehemently submitted that the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the conferment of permanent status ordered by the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health be nod disturbed, is wholly impermissible, as the said authority is not vested with any power to grant permanent status to the petitioners/labourers and any order passed for conferment of permanent status to the petitioners/labourers by the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health is nothing but usurping the power vested on some other authority, which cannot be allowed to continue.
6. This Court gave its anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
7. A perusal of the materials available in the typed set reveals that the petitioners/labourers were not under the direct employment of the respondent authorities, but they were engaged through contractors, which is not in dispute. http://www.judis.nic.in7/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013 When there is no direct relationship between the petitioners/labourers and the respondents, and the relationship only being through an intermediary, the contractor, who has engaged the petitioners, the petitioners are estopped from invoking the provisions of the Permanent Status Act to seek the relief of grant of permanent status to them for the services rendered to the respondents. True it is that the petitioners are continuing as labourers irrespective of the change in contractors every year, which too is not in dispute, however, direct relationship between the petitioners/labourers and the respondent authorities has not been established and further it is also evident from the records that there is no direct relationship between the petitioners/labourers and the respondent authorities and it is only the contractor, who has a relationship with the respondent authorities. In such a backdrop, when there exists no direct relationship between the petitioners/labourers and the respondent authorities, invoking the provisions of the Permanent Status Act by the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health to grant the relief of permanent status, is wholly misconceived and impermissible. The petitioners/labourers being not directly employed by the respondent authorities, the invocation of power by the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health, which is not vested in him, cannot be allowed to stand and the same deserves to be interfered with. http://www.judis.nic.in8/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013
8. However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/labourers pleaded that the inadvertance in filing the petition before a wrong authority should not preclude the petitioners of their right to get permanent status and, therefore, this Court may grant liberty to the petitioners to file appropriate petition under the Industrial Disputes Act for raising dispute to seek appropriate relief under the Contract Labour Act.
9. Considering the overall gamut of the facts and circumstances narrated above, this Court, for the reasons aforesaid, is not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioners/labourers in W.P. No.16188/13. Accordingly, the order passed by the Deputy Director of Industrial Security and Health is set aside and W.P. No.19370 of 2013 is allowed. Consequently, W.P. No.16188 of 2013 is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to file appropriate petition under the Industrial Disputes Act for raising dispute to seek appropriate remedy under the Contract Labour Act, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs.
22.09.2020 Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No GLN http://www.judis.nic.in9/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013 To
1. The Secretary to Government Cooperation, Food & Consumer Protection Department Fort St. George Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Chairman – cum - Managing Director Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
No.10, Thambusamy Road Chennai – 600 010.
3. The Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
Sidco Complex, Vengikkal, Tiruvannamalai District – 606 604.
4. The Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) Modern Rice Mill, TNCSC Ltd., Polur Taluk Tiruvannamalai District.
5.The Deputy Director Industrial Security & Health Thiruvannamalai.
http://www.judis.nic.in10/11 ____________ W.P.Nos.16188 and 19370 of 2013 M.DHANDAPANI, J GLN W.P. NOS. 16188 & 19370 of 2013 22.09.2020 http://www.judis.nic.in11/11