Madras High Court
M.Alim Basha vs The Management Of on 23 February, 2018
Author: T.Raja
Bench: T.Raja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.02.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
W.P.No.4052 of 2018
M.Alim Basha .. Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Management of
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
rep by its Chairman and Managing Director
BHEL Corporate Office
Siri Fort
New Delhi 110 049
2. The Executive Director
(CMP & IP MM & Monitoring)
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
Ranipet, Vellore 632 406
3. The Senior Dy.General Manager (HR)
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
Ranipet, Vellore 632 406 .. Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the third respondent in his proceedings in BAP:HR:MISC dated 25.04.2016 and quash the same and direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on permanent basis in the post of Artisan Grade IV in mechanic trade.
For Petitioner :: Mr.S.Sathish Rajan
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings dated 25.4.2016 refusing the request of the petitioner, who was appointed as an apprentice, for absorption.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, assailing the impugned order, submitted that the petitioner, after obtaining the National Trade Certificate in Mechanic from the recognized ITI-Pallavan Industrial Training Institute, Arcot, Vellore District, enrolled himself in the employment exchange. Subsequently, he was sponsored by the employment exchange for undergoing the apprenticeship training with BHEL for one year from 6.10.99 to 5.10.2000. For the purpose of imparting training, the respondent-BHEL also conducted examination and only after passing the examination, the petitioner was inducted as apprentice. After undergoing the examination and completing the apprenticeship training in Draughtsman (Mechanical) for a period of one year from 6.10.99 to 5.10.2000, he was also issued with a certificate to that effect by the BHEL. But they have not issued any appointment order. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that when the BHEL have been absorbing several apprenticeship trainees in Trichy region, after sometime, they stopped absorbing the apprenticeship trainees, which resulted in the filing of W.P.(MD) Nos.8675 of 2006 etc., and an order was also passed allowing the writ petitions on 12.10.2007 and the said order was also confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) Nos.685 to 687 of 2007 vide judgment dated 14.5.2008. Thereafter, the Apex Court by its order dated 3.10.2013 in Civil Appeal Nos.10815 and 10816 of 2013, directed the absorption of the 124 apprentices in Trichy region. Similarly, when the apprentices working in Ranipet region also filed W.P.Nos.11293 of 2006 etc., batch, this Court by order dated 23.6.2008 allowed the writ petitions with a direction to the BHEL to undertake the exercise of considering the case of the petitioners therein in the light of the earlier order, holding that in the light of the new policy and the distinction being made to the Section 12(3) settlement, whether the case of the petitioners therein can be thrown out by stating that the workmen have no preference for employment. However, the said order was set aside by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.Nos.1047 to 1062 of 2008 and W.P.No.9713 of 2002 by order dated 10.2.2015. As against that, SLP has been filed and the same is also posted for hearing. Therefore, the matter may be kept in abeyance till the Supreme Court decides the case.
3. But this Court is unable to entertain any such request legally. The reason is that when the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in its order dated 10.2.2015 passed in W.A.Nos.1047 to 1062 of 2008 and W.P.No.9713 of 2002 overturned the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.Nos.11293 of 2006 etc., dated 23.6.2008 holding that the apprentices who had undergone the training, on completion of the same, were discharged from the services many years before the filing of the writ petitions and that the settlement arrived at under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act between the Union and the BHEL dealt with the case of NMRs absorption in a phased manner and not in respect of the apprentices, this Court, being bound by the same, is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
Speaking/Non speaking order 23.02.2018
Index : yes/no
ss
To
1. The Chairman and Managing Director
Management of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
BHEL Corporate Office
Siri Fort
New Delhi 110 049
2. The Executive Director
(CMP & IP MM & Monitoring)
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
Ranipet
Vellore 632 406
3. The Senior Dy.General Manager (HR)
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
Ranipet
Vellore 632 406
T.RAJA, J.
ss
W.P.No.4052 of 2018
23.02.2018