Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Presiding Officer on 29 March, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 29 th OF MARCH, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 4505 of 2005
BETWEEN:-
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH SUB
DIVISIONAL OFFICER PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT SUB DIVISION NO. 2 BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER PUBLIC WORKS
D E PA R T M E N T CENTRAL ZONE BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT MAINTAINANCE DIVISION NO. 1
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
AND
1. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT NO. 1
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VISHANATH S/O NARAYAN SINGH OCCUPATION:
DAILY WAGER P.W.D. SUB DIVISION NO. 2
MAINTAINANCE BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT. GANGOO BAI W/O DHADU OCCUPATION:
DAILY WAGER P.W.D. SUB DIVISION NO. 2
MAINTAINANCE BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SMT. SAVITRI BAI W/O MATHURAPRASAD
OCCUPATION: DAILY WAGER P.W.D. SUB
DIVISION 0.2 SHYMLA HILLS MAINTAINANCE NO.
12 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. HAMID KADAR W/O MAHID KADAR
OCCUPATION: DAILY WAGER SUB DIVISION NO.2
P.W.D. MAINTAINANCE DIVISION NO. 1 BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VAIBHAV
YEOLEKAR
Signing time: 3/31/2023
11:52:40 AM
2
6. SMT. MAJULA BAI W/O SHIVRAM OCCUPATION:
DAILY WAGER P.W.D. SUB DIVISION NO. 2
MAINTAINANCE P.W.D. BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
7. SMT. SASHIKALA BAI W/O DHAMAJI
OCCUPATION: DAILY WAGER SUB DIVISION NO. 2
MAINTAINANCE NO. 1 P.W.D BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
8. SMT. TULSA BAI W/O ASRU OCCUPATION: DAILY
WAGER SUB DIVISION NO. 2 MAINTAINANCE NO.
1 P.W.D BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
9. MOHANLAL S/O KAHAIYALAL OCCUPATION:
DAILY WAGER SUB DIVISION NO. 2
MAINTAINANCE NO. 1 P.W.D BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
10. SMT. PARWATI BAI W/O HAKKU OCCUPATION:
DAILY WAGER SUB DIVISION NO. 2
MAINTAINANCE NO. 1 P.W.D BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
11. SMT. SURJABAI W/O BALAJI OCCUPATION: DAILY
WAGER P.W.D CITY SUB DIVISION NO. 3
MAINTAINANCE NO. 1 BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
12. SMT. SANGADHA BAI W/O BHIKA OCCUPATION:
DAILY WAGER P.W.D. CITY SUB DIVISION NO. 3 K
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
13. INAYAT KHAN S/O SABIR KHAN OCCUPATION:
DAILT WAGER CITY SUB DIVISION, KENDRIYA
BHANDAR NO 1, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
14. SULTAM KHAN S/O RAHAMAT KHAN
OCCUPATION: DAILT WAGER CITY SUB DIVISION,
KENDRIYA BHANDAR , MAINTANANCE NO 1,
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
15. MOHD. RAFIQ S/O AHMAD OCCUPATION: DAILT
WAGER CITY SUB DIVISION, KENDRIYA
BHANDAR , MAINTANANCE NO 1, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
16. NAJIR KHAN S/O CHAND KHAN OCCUPATION:
DAILT WAGER CITY SUB DIVISION, KENDRIYA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VAIBHAV
YEOLEKAR
Signing time: 3/31/2023
11:52:40 AM
3
BHANDAR , MAINTANANCE NO 1, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
17. KAMRUL HAQ S/O ABUDL WAHAD OCCUPATION:
DAILT WAGER CITY SUB DIVISION, KENDRIYA
BHANDAR , MAINTANANCE NO 1, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
18. SMT. TULSA BAI W/O JOGESHWAR OCCUPATION:
DAILT WAGER CITY SUB DIVISION, KENDRIYA
BHANDAR , MAINTANANCE NO 1, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SANJAY VERMA - ADVOCATE FOR THE CAVEATORS)
Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the State Government being aggrieved of order dated 29/01/2005 passed by the learned Labour Court No. 1, Bhopal in case no. 7/03/ID reference directing reinstatement of the respondents with back wages.
Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Government Advocate submits that respondents were working as 'Gangmen'. On completing 30 years of service, they were retired.
This action of the petitioner was challenged by the respondents before the Labour Court. The Labour Court showed undue indulgence whereas there was no need for making compliance of the provisions of Sections 25 f and 25 n of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is therefore submitted that the impugned order passed by the Labour Court be set aside.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the caveators in his turn places reliance on a full Bench decision of this High Court in Vishnu and others Vs. State of M.P. and others 2006 (1) MPLJ 23 decided on Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 3/31/2023 11:52:40 AM 4 2/12/2005 in W.P. No. 1693/2005 at Gwalior Bench of this High Court wherein the Hon'ble Full Bench has held that Gangmen are covered under the definition of Work Charge Contingency Employee and though, they are not included in the schedule of 1979 Rules, but they are entitled to continue in service upto the prescribed age of superannuation for the Class-IV employees of the State Government i.e. 62 years.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the judgment of the Full Bench of this High Court in Vishnu (supra), I am of the opinion that this case is squarely covered by the decision of the Full Bench and, therefore, no indulgence is required.
Accordingly, the petition fails and is dismissed.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE vy Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 3/31/2023 11:52:40 AM