Chattisgarh High Court
State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr vs Chhattisgarh Jal Sansadhan Majdur ... on 5 February, 2018
Author: P. Sam Koshy
Bench: P. Sam Koshy
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 114 OF 2013
1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through-Secretary, Water Resources
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Mantralaya, Naya Raipur,
P.S. Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Raipur, P.S. Civil
Lines, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Petitioners
versus
1. Chhattisgarh Jal Sansadhan Majdur Sangh, Durg, Through Its
Secretary General Yashwant Sahu, Banspara, P.S. City Kotwali
Distt. Durg (C.G.) (C.G. Shaskiya Laghu Vetan Karmachari Sangh),
Through Jagnuram S/o Ludruram, Mahasamund)
2. State Industrial Court, Raipur, P.S. Civil Lines, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondents
WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 4311 OF 2013
1. Jugnuram S/o Ludaru Ram Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Paraskol, P.O.Mahasamund Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
2. Mannulal S/o Kanhaiya Lal, aged about 52 years, R/o Village Bhalesar, P.O. Kenkera, PS Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G.
3. Lachhiram S/o Johat Ram Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Baronda Bazar, Post Bahmani, PS Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
4. Ganeshram S/o Magdhu Ram Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Po Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Tah And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
5. Firanta, S/o Sampat, Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Parasada P.O. Bemcha, PS Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
6. Lakshman, S/o Sundar Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Muski, P.O. Tumgaon, PS Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
7. Bahoor, S/o Shri Kamal Narayan Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Kapa Birkoni, Po Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Tah And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
8. Lalluram S/o Teerath, Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Pacheda, P.O. Pacheda, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
9. Purushottam, S/o Guha Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Bhalesar, P.O. Kenkera, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District :
Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
10. Sundar S/o Sewaram, aged about 51 years R/o Village And Post Bahmani, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G.
11. Tiharoo S/o Fulooram Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Lafinkala, P.O. Lafinkhurd, PS Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh -2-
12. Madan S/o Shri Derha Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Lafinkala, P.O. Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
13. Hulasram S/o Ghurau Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Po Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Tah And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
14. Lakhanlal S/o Bhukhan Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Po Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Tah And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
15. Santosh S/o Pooran Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Po Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Tah And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
16. Parasram S/o Shivdayal Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Po Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Tah And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
17. Hariram S/o Ramlal Aged About 53 Years R/o Village And Po Bemcha, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
18. Kheduram S/o Jethu, aged about 54 years R/o Village And P.O. Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G.
19. Omprakash S/o Manrakhan Aged About 52 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
20. Firturam S/o Baijoo Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Barbaspur, P.O. Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
21. Bhukhan S/o Bodoo Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Barbaspur, P.O. Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
22. Sudan S/o Chintaram Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Bhalesar, P.O. Kenkera, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
23. Ramji S/o Ramesar Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Parasada Nayapara, P.O. Bemcha, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
24. Narayan Yadav S/o Kartik Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Chorbhatti, P.O. Sorid, Ps Mahasamund, Tah. And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
25. Purushottam S/o Kailal, aged about 50 years R/o Village Bhalesar, P.O. Kenkera, Distt. Mahasamund C.G.
26. Jaasal S/o Kheduram Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
27. Rajvantin, S/o Firanta Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh -3-
28. Kuntram S/o Ramoo Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Bhalesar, P.O. Kenkera, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
29. Dukaluram S/o Bisesar Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Baronda Bazar, Post Bahmani, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
30. Aasbati D/o Shri Salik Aged About 50 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
31. Chhannuram S/o Tuka Aged About 49 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
32. Niralabai D/o Shri Thanu, aged about 59 years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G.
33. Bhururam S/o Shobhit Aged About 51 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
34. Kamtibai D/o Bisoha Aged About 47 Years R/o Village And Post Bahmani, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
35. Hemlal S/o Bhuneswar Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Bhalesar, P.O. Kenkera, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
36. Birjhu S/o Shri Derha Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Lafinkala, Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
37. Kishun S/o Shri Janak Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Baronda Bazar, Post Bahmani, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
38. Ghanshyam S/o Banau Aged About 50 Years R/o Village And Po Bemcha, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
39. Vishnu S/o Shri Jaitram Aged About 50 Years R/o Village And Post Bahmani, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
40. Ghasiya S/o Chhabilal Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Lafinkala, P.O. Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
41. Jamuna Bai D/o Chhatar Singh Aged About 58 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
42. Kumar S/o Shri Uderam Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Parasada P.O. Bemcha, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
43. Parmanand S/o Tirath Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post Bahmani, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh -4-
44. Dilip S/o Puneet Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Parasada P.O. Bemcha, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
45. Bisejan S/o Tibhuram Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Badgaon, P.O. Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
46. Bharat S/o Jagatpal Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Badgaon, P.O. Birkoni, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
47. Jodhan S/o Bisahoo Aged About 58 Years R/o Village And P.O. Pacheda, Ps Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District :
Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh
48. Dularu S/o Nanduram Aged About 55 Years R/o Village And Post Lafinkhurd, Ps Mahasamund, Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh
2. Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Department, Govt. Of C.G., Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur C.G., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department Govt. Of C.G., Mahanadi Godavari Kachhar, Sihawa Bhawan, Raipur C.G., District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4. Superintending Engineer, Water Resources And Ground Water Survey Division, Govt. Of C.G., Sihawa Bhawan, Raipur C.G., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
5. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division Govt. Of C.G., Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund C.G., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents • Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate, for the Workers. • Mr. S.P. Kale, Dy. Advocate General, for the State.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/02/2018
1. The present are two writ petitions arising out of the same issue involved.
2. W.P.(L) No. 114/2013 is a petition filed by the State Government challenging the orders, dated 9.4.2012 and 20.9.2012, passed by the Industrial Court, Raipur whereby the appeal preferred by the State and a -5- review petition again preferred by the State stood rejected. The challenge is also to the order passed by the Labour Court in Case No. 120/96/M.P.I.R.Act, decided on 23.1.1999, by the Labour Court, Raipur, whereby the claim pertaining to the termination of services of the workers involved in the present dispute has been allowed and in addition to the relief of reinstatement in service with 40% of back-wages, the Labour Court has also ordered the State Government to classify the workers involved in the case to the respective post on which they were working.
3. So far as W.P.(S) No. 4311/2013 is concerned, it is a petition filed by the workers involved in the dispute seeking for a direction from the High Court to be issued to the State Government for considering the case of the workers for regularization of their services with regular pay-scale in the Water Resources Department.
4. At the outset, Shri Ashish Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the workers, submits that the State Government pending the dispute before this Court had issued a circular on 5.3.2008 whereby in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Uma Devi (3) and others, 2006 (4) SCC 1, a policy decision was taken for consideration of the cases of all those workers for regularization who were in employment prior to 31.12.1997. It was also the contention of Shri Shrivastava that pursuant to the said circular/policy decision of the State Government, dated 5.3.2008, the department has already issued instructions granting regularization to similarly placed daily wage employees in the department and all of whom have been regularized in services. The case of the workers involved in the present petitions was not considered only on account of pendency of writ petitions before the High Court. He further submits that in the light of the policy decision taken by the State Government, the case of each of the -6- workers involved in the case be also considered in similar fashion as has been done in the case of other similar placed daily wage employees who have already been regularized and appropriate orders be passed at the earliest.
5. Shri S.P. Kale, learned Deputy Advocate General, on the contrary, submits that the State Government has also filed a petition wherein the order of the Labour Court and the two orders of the Industrial Court are under challenge. He submits that the Labour Court at the outset could not have issued a relief of classification. It was further submitted that the Labour Court also could not have granted the relief of 40% of back-wages when apparently the status of the workers were that of a daily wage worker whose services were discontinued after day's work is over. It was also the contention of the learned State Counsel that the finding of the Industrial Court also in this regard is not proper, legal and justified and the three orders thus deserve to be set aside.
6. Perusal of record would show that the case of each of the workers before this Court is of having worked with the department between 1985- 86 to 1.3.1996 and thereafter their services got discontinued. They raised a dispute and in their favour an order of reinstatement with 40% of back-
wages was passed by the Labour Court on 23.1.1999. The State Government preferred an appeal before the Industrial Court at Raipur and pending the appeal before the Industrial Court, the workers involved in the present case have been reinstated in services on 8.9.2008 and since 8.9.2008 all the workers are continuously working till date except for those who have crossed the age of superannuation. What also cannot be brushed aside is the fact that from the date of order of the Labour Court, i.e., 23.1.1999, to 7.9.2008, i.e., the date prior to the reinstatement being done, the respective workers have been paid the last wage drawn by the -7- State Government in compliance of the provisions of Section 65(3) of the M.P.I.R. Act. Subsequent to reinstatement on 8.9.2008, the workers continued in employment till date, that is to say that they have again put in about 10 years of services.
7. Considering the fact that the workers initially prior to the litigation before the Labour Court and the Industrial Court had put in about 10 years of services and subsequent to reinstatement, i.e., on 8.9.2008, they have again put in about 10 years of services, this Court at this juncture does not intent to go into the merits of the case.
8. This Court is inclined to dispose of these writ petitions with a specific direction to the State Government to consider the case of the workers involved in the present petitions for regularisation keeping in view the policy of the State Government, dated 5.3.2008. While, taking the decision in the case of the present workers for regularisation, the department shall also keep in mind the earlier orders passed in the case of similarly placed workers who were granted the relief of reinstatement on 13.8.2008. The department may also consider whether these workers would be entitled for being placed at par with the persons who were engaged along with them or subsequent to them and who have already been regularized.
9. It is made clear that since this Court has not entered into the merits of the case testing the veracity of the order of the Labour Court and the two orders of the Industrial Court, it is ordered that the workers involved in the present case shall not claim any benefit which has accrued to them except for the order of reinstatement.
10. Since it is an old matter, the State Government should take a decision at the earliest preferably within a period of three months from the date of obtaining of certified copy of this order.
-8-11. With the aforesaid directions, the two writ petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
/sharad/ Judge