Gujarat High Court
Idbi Bank Ltd. Contract Workers Union ... vs Chief General Manager & 2 on 18 May, 2016
Author: A.J. Shastri
Bench: A.J. Shastri
C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO.4511 of 2016
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20854 of 2015
==========================================================
IDBI BANK LTD. CONTRACT WORKERS UNION (GUJARAT)....Applicant(s)
Versus
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER & 2....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JT TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KR MISHRA, ADVOCATE for the applicant(s) No.1
MR BG JANI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI
Date : 18/05/2016
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr.J.T.Trivedi, learned advocate for the applicant-Union and Mr.B.G.Jani, learned advocate for respondent No.1-Bank.
2. By way of the present Civil Application, the applicant-Union has prayed for the following reliefs:
"7[a] This Court may be pleased to allow the present application;
[b] This Court may be pleased to enjoin upon the respondent No.1-Bank to continue the employment of the members of the applicant-Union as per the list annexed with the demand raised before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) in case of Page 1 of 7 HC-NIC Page 1 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016 C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER change of contract till the disposal of the Reference (CGITA) No.17 of 2015;
[c] This Court may be pleased to grant other and further relief in the interest of justice."
3. While preferring this Civil Application, initially the request was made by the learned advocate for the applicant for urgent circulation and considering the urgency sought by the learned advocate for the applicant, the matter was permitted to be circulated on 16.5.2016. On 16.5.2016, only the civil application was circulated without the papers of main matter being Special Civil Application. Since the time was getting lapsed and the employees, who are the members of the applicant-Union, who are said to have been working since last several years ranging from 2 to 20 years, were facing the discontinuance of service. This Court with a view to see that no irreversible situation is created has passed the following order on 16.05.2016:
"1. Leave to add list of employees who have sought to be discontinued as stated by the learned advocate Mr.Trivedi for the applicant.
2. Heard Mr.Trivedi, learned advocate for the applicant. He has specifically contended that only on account of change of contractor, the services of the old employees cannot be discontinued as they are working with the contractor since number of years. In that view of the matter, without expressing any opinion on merits in detail, for the time being, Notice, returnable on 18.5.2016 and in the meantime, services of the members of the applicant who are mentioned in the list, may not be discontinued. The said list is to be taken on record as produced by the learned advocate for the applicant and this interim protection has been granted on the specific understanding given by the learned advocate Mr.Trivedi for the applicant that this protection may not be utilized to claim any equity in whatsoever manner. Therefore, just with a view to see that no irreversible situation created, Page 2 of 7 HC-NIC Page 2 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016 C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER for the time being, interim relief granted as stated above till the returnable date.
3. Direct service, today, is permitted.
4. The applicant is permitted to serve the copy of the order by fax or any other electronic mode in additional to the direct service.
4. After passing the aforesaid order, the notice of the Court was served upon the respondents wherein the learned advocate Mr.B.G.Jani has appeared on behalf of respondent No.1-Bank and has filed affidavit-in-reply which is taken on record. Though the other respondents are said to have been served, they have chosen not to appear but since the issue was touching to the employees of the lower strata of society, the matter was taken up for hearing. At the time of hearing, learned advocate Mr.B.G.Jani has filed the affidavit-in-reply and has drawn the attention of this Court that the issue pertaining to these employees, who are the members of the applicant-Union, has been taken up for consideration at Exh.-5 application, which was submitted in Reference No.17 of 2015, is dealt with and order came to be passed on 06.11.2015. Mr.Jani, learned advocate has drawn the specific attention of this Court of the last paragraph of the order dated 6.11.2015 and has submitted that the new contractor has been persuaded to provide the services of the present workmen with the banks in consultation with the observations made by the learned Presiding Officer on 6.11.2015. It was also clarified by the learned advocate Mr.Jani appearing for the respondent No.1-Bank that the employees are not the employees of the bank but are the employees of the contractor and Exh.5 application is already disposed of on 6.11.2015. Mr.Jani, learned advocate has submitted that this very order Page 3 of 7 HC-NIC Page 3 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016 C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER dated 6.11.2015 is challenged in a petition being Special Civil Application No.20854 of 2015 filed by the applicant and in view of the fact that the papers of the said Special Civil Application has been called for from the department as was not tagged with papers of civil application.
5. On perusal of the papers of writ petition, it appears that the said writ petition was filed by the applicant-Union on 15.12.2015 but so far in the said main writ petition no notice is issued and all the way, time has been sought for by the learned advocate for the applicant for one reason or the other. Lastly, the said writ petition was placed on board on 21.4.2016 wherein as per the request of the learned advocate for the applicant, the matter was adjourned beyond vacation on 16.06.2016.
6. Having drawn the attention of this Court and perused the papers of the writ petition, it transpires that the said order dated 6.11.2015 passed below Exh.-5 was very much under challenge. The submission made by the learned advocate for the applicant-Union that the writ petition was not processed and proceeded further in view of the fact that there was no eminent urgency and no such kind of situation was apprehended and, therefore, the writ petition was not proceeded further. However, in the meantime, during the passage of time, it has come to the notice of the applicant that the contract of labour contract worker with the IDBI Bank came to be over on 15.5.2016 and, therefore, the learned advocate Mr.Trivedi has stated that there was no occasion for him to proceed further with the writ petition. Be that as it may. During the pendency of the main writ petition, one Page 4 of 7 HC-NIC Page 4 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016 C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER communication is received by the employees of the applicant- Union from a contractor M/s Safal Hospitality and Maintenance Services indicating that the labour contract work with IDBI Bank is getting lapsed on 15.5.2016 and, therefore, the concerned employees were requested to take note of the fact that their services stand discontinued from the receipt of this communication. Learned advocate having come to know, has been constrained to move civil application in such urgent situation and that is the reason why during vacation the aforesaid civil application got circulated in view of the communication which is attached the civil application. It appears that the respondent No.2 has specifically informed the members of the applicant-Union that their services will be discontinued from 15.5.2016 and they will receive their dues within a period of 10 days. Since this abruptly came to be received by the applicant, a request was made by the learned advocate for the applicant to move civil application and that is the reason why in such an emergent situation, the Court was constrained to pass order on 16.5.2016 as stated earlier.
7. The aforesaid order of immediate protection for limited purpose was granted and solely on the basis of specific condition that the protection which is granted may not be utilized to claim any equity in whatsoever manner.
8. Today, when the civil application came up for consideration, a request was made by the learned advocate for the applicant-Union that some breathing time be given to the applicant so as to enable it to obtain suitable orders in view of such abrupt situation which is created for the members of the applicant-Union from the forum below.
Page 5 of 7HC-NIC Page 5 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016 C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER
9. In that view of the matter, a request was made by the learned advocate for the applicant to continue protection for some limited period so as to enable him to approach the appropriate Tribunal with an application for seeking urgent orders.
10. Mr.Jani, learned advocate for the respondent No.1- Bank has clarified that pursuant to the earlier order dated 6.11.2015, the new contractor was already persuaded and since the bank is not concerned that it may be open for the learned advocate for the applicant to take any appropriate step keeping this factors in mind. Therefore, it is in the interest of justice to grant some time to the applicant so as to enable it to approach appropriate forum with an appropriate application.
11. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant-Union is permitted to file an appropriate application before the appropriate forum and for that purpose, the protection, which has been granted without creating any equity, is continued for a period of one week only. It is needless to say that this Court has not gone in the merits of the case and has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case in detail and it would be open for the applicant to raise any contention, which may be available to him under the law before the appropriate forum in the application, which is to be filed. Hence, considering the fact that the protection, which has been granted against discontinuing the members of the applicant-Union will continue to operate for a period of one week from today.
Page 6 of 7HC-NIC Page 6 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016 C/CA/4511/2016 ORDER
12. In view of above, on instructions, the learned advocate Mr.Trivedi seeks permission to withdraw the main petition being Special Civil Application No.20854 of 2015 as well as Civil Application No.4511 of 2016. Permission as prayed for is granted. Special Civil Application No.20854 of 2015 and Civil Application No.4511 of 2016 both stand disposed of as withdrawn. The protection envisaged in the order dated 16.05.2016, is ordered to be operative till one week from today.
Direct service is permitted.
(A.J. SHASTRI, J.) Ashish Tripathi Page 7 of 7 HC-NIC Page 7 of 7 Created On Fri May 20 00:11:54 IST 2016