Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dilip Sharma vs Union Of India (2024:Rj-Jd:36796) on 4 September, 2024
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2024:RJ-JD:36796]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14498/2024
1. Dilip Sharma S/o Shri Vedhraj Sharma, Aged About 59
Years, Resident Of Type 3/20K, Anupratap Colony,
Antaraliya, Chittorgarh (Raj.). - Chairman, Rawatbhata
Rajasthan Site Karamchari Sangh (Npc), Anupratap
Colony, Post Bhabha Nagar, Rawatbhata, District
Chittorgarh.
2. Gerutama Parasar S/o Late Shri Murari Lal, Aged About
52 Years, Resident Of Quarter No. Type 2/22G, Anukiran
Colony, Post Bhabhanagar, Rawatbhata, District
Chittorgarh.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through Chief Labour Commissioner
(Central), Shramev Jayate Bhawan, G-4, Sector 10,
Dwarka, New Delhi.
2. Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Shramev
Jayate Bhawan, Haribhau Upadhyay Nagar Vistar, Pushkar
Road, Ajmer, Distt. Ajmer.
3. Returning Officer, Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner
(Central), Ahemdabad, Additional Charge Ajmer, Distt.
Ajmer.
4. Nuclear Power Corporation Of India Limited, Rawatbhata,
Rajasthan Site, District Chittorgarh.
5. Site Director, Rajasthan Atomic Power Station, Npcil, Rr
Site, Po Anushakti, Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh.
6. Rawatbhata Rajasthan Site Karamchari Sangh (Npc),
Anupratap Colony, Post Bhabha Nagar, Rawatbhata,
District Chittorgarh - Through Its Secretary.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Bohra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, DSG with
Ms. Dimple Rajpurohit
Mr. Mukul Singhvi
(Downloaded on 06/09/2024 at 09:45:04 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:36796] (2 of 3) [CW-14498/2024]
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order 04/09/2024
1. The present writ petition has been preferred against the order dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure-7) passed by respondent No.3
- Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Ahemdabad whereby the objection as raised by petitioner No.1 Dilip Sharma, has been rejected.
An objection was raised by petitioner No.1, vide his email, to the Returning Officer to add names of the employees who are working in 'Foreman' category, in the voter list.
2. The objection as raised by petitioner No.1 has been rejected by the order impugned with a specific finding that all the Foreman designated employees of Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), RR Site, Rawatbhata fall under the Supervisory category as per NPCIL corporate office letter dated 21.06.2013, therefore, they do not fall under the definition of 'workman' as defined under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
3. Vide Notification/communication dated 21.06.2013 (which has been placed on record today by learned counsel for NPCIL), it was communicated as under :
"The categorization of employees as 'workmen' was notified vide Corporate Office letter No.NPCIL/VSB/ IR/161/641 dated 05.02.2001. In supersession of the aforesaid letter dated 05.02.2001, the revised categorization of employees as workmen is enclosed as Annexure-1. The employees covered in Annexure-1 shall be treated as "Workmen" in NPCIL for the purpose of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, Standing Orders/Model (Downloaded on 06/09/2024 at 09:45:04 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:36796] (3 of 3) [CW-14498/2024] Standing Orders as per the Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act, 1946 and for the purpose of all other legislations and Acts in which the meaning of workman has been assigned as defined under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The remaining employees other than Executives shall be treated as Supervisors (Non-Workmen).
This categorization of employees is not to be linked to any other benefit and facility extended to the employees under the provisions of any other Rules."
4. Admittedly, the list Annexure-1, as enclosed with the above communication, does not include any of the grade of Foreman. Meaning thereby, all grades of Foreman were to be treated as Supervisors (non-workmen).
5. The Notification/communication dated 21.06.2013 is not under challenge in the present writ petition and hence, the order impugned, which has been passed on basis of the said communication, cannot be interfered with, without a challenge been laid to communication dated 21.06.2013.
6. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the issue shall remain open for the petitioners to be raised while challenging the Notification/communication dated 21.06.2013.
7. Stay petition and the pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J 354-SP/Vij/-
(Downloaded on 06/09/2024 at 09:45:04 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)