Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Harishankar Gupta vs M.D.,Raj.State Ganganagar ... on 16 October, 2008
Author: Govind Mathur
Bench: Govind Mathur
1
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5409/2004
HARI SHANKAR GUPTA VS. MANAGING DIRECTOR,
RAJASTHAN STATE
GANGANAGAR SUGAR MILLS,
SRI GANGANAGAR
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4958/2004
BALDEV SINGH VS. MANAGING DIRECTOR,
RAJASTHAN STATE
GANGANAGAR SUGAR MILLS,
SRI GANGANAGAR
DATE OF ORDER : 16.10.2008.
HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J.
Mr. K.S. Yadav for the petitioners.
Mr. V.K. Aggarwal for the respondents.
These two petitions for writ are based on same facts and also involves similar questions of law, therefore, are disposed of by a common order.
The factual matrix requires notice is that an Arbitrator was appointed to consider various issues raised by the Trade Unions operating in the Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills and the Arbitrator passed an award on 31.05.1994, commonly known as "Sodani Award". As per the award dated 31.05.1994, services of seasonal workmen were required to be regularized as per seniority in phase manner. 2
The petitioners Hari Shankar Gupta and Baldev Singh were employed with Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd. as seasonal workmen, as such, their candidature was also required to be considered for regularisation. The respondents considered and allowed regularisation of services of number of persons including the persons junior than the petitioners but ignored their case. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners through their trade union raised industrial disputes independently and those were referred to Labour Court, Sri Ganganagar for their adjudication. Before the Labour Court, the employer accepted that the workmen Manmohan Singh Bains, Abdul Sattar and Gurmail Singh to whom benefit for regularisation was given, are junior to workmen Hari Shankar Gupta and Baldev Singh, however, the labour court vide two separate awards dated 12.04.2002 negativated claims of the petitioners on the count that as per the provisions of Rajasthan Employment (Regularisation of Appointment and Staff) Act, 1999, services of no casual workman could have been regularized. Being aggrieved by the awards above, these petitions for writ are preferred.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that, as a matter of fact, the provisions of Section 11 of the Act of 1999 have already been declared illegal by this Court in the 3 case of Bhawani Singh vs. State of Rajasthan and others and also for the reason that the persons junior than the petitioners were regularised, therefore, the case of the petitioners deserves to be considered for regularisation as per the provisions of the Sodani Award dated 31.05.1984.
On examination of record, it is apparent that the labour court failed to examine the services of the persons junior than the petitioners were already regularized by the employer as per the "Sodani Award". The court below should have considered the issue relating to discrimination among similarly situated workmen. In the present case, the employer is having no just reason to deny consideration for regularisation to the petitioners while extending such consideration to their juniors. In view of it, the award dated 12.04.2002 (I.D.No.23/2001 Hari Shankar Gupta vs. the Managing Director, Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd, Sri Ganganagar) and (I.D.No.22/2001 Baldev Singh vs. the Managing Director, Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd, Sri Ganganagar) are declared illegal.
Accordingly, the petitions for writ are allowed and the awards impugned are quashed. The industrial disputes raised by the workmen and referred by the appropriate government under 4 its notification dated 15.03.2001 relating to both the petitioners is answered in the terms that the workmen are entitled to be considered for regularization of their services as per the provisions of the Sodani Award dated 31.05.1984. The employer is required to make such consideration within a period of three months from today.
No order to cost.
(GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/