Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sharda Prabandhak Samiti Karmchari ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 8 January, 2014
1
Writ Petition No.18552/2013
8.1.2014
Shri Sanjay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri S.S. Bisen, learned Government Advocate for State
of M.P. on advance notice.
Heard on admission.
There exists a deity at Maihar: "Maa Sharda Devi".
That an Act has been enacted by the Madhya Pradesh
Legislature to provide for the better maintenance,
preservation, administration and governance of "Maa Sharda
Devi Mandir" and its endowment and for matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto. The Act is called the Madhya
Pradesh Maa Sharda Devi Mandir Adhiniyam, 2002.
Section 3(e) defines "Committee" to mean the "Maa
Sharda Devi Mandir" Managing Committee constituted under
the statute. Chapter II lays down the provisions as to vesting
of property and constitution of committee. As per Section 5,
the possession, administration, control and management of the
Mandir and its endowments vests in "Committee". The
"Committee" is constituted under Section 6. Section 11 lays
down the duties of the Committee. It stipulates that subject to
the provisions of the Act of 2002 and the rules made
thereunder, it shall be the duty of the committee to - (i)
arrange for the proper performance of worship, "puja archana"
and the daily and periodical rites of the Mandir; (ii) provide
facilities for the offering of worship by devotess; (iii) ensure
the safe custody of funds, valuables and jewelleries and the
preservation and management of the properties vested in the
Mandir; (iv) ensure maintenance of order and discipline and
2
proper hygienic condition in the Mandir and proper standard of
cleanliness and purity in the offerings made therein; (v) ensure
that the funds of the endowments of the Mandir are spent
according to the wishes, so far as may be known, of the
donors; (vi) do all such things as may be incidental and
conducive to the efficient management of the affairs of the
Mandir and the convenience of the worshippers; and (vii)
promote any other religious, educational, cultural or charitable
activity.
Chapter III deals with appointment of Administrator and
Establishment. Section 17 provides for creation of posts and
appointments of officers and employees. It stipulates that the
posts of officers and employees of the Committee shall be
created after prior approval of the State Government. Sub-
section (2) of Section 17 empowers the Collector to make
appointment of all officers (except Administrator) and other
employees of the Mandir. That, as per sub-section (3) of S.17,
appointment of officers and other employees are as per
procedure laid down in the bye-laws.
Petitioner, a registered Trade Union affiliated to INTUC,
has filed this petition at the instance of Barbers, who are
enlisted to facilitate daily and periodical rites of the devotees at
"Nai Mundan Parisar" (enclosure where the tonsure ceremony
is performed), seeking direction for regularization of their
services and to pay minimum wages of their service. The claim
is on the basis of provisions contained in the M.P. Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 and the Rules made
thereunder, the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and the Vth
Schedule of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
3
After hearing learned counsel for the parties at length
and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has
failed to establish that the Barbers are being appointed in
furtherance to provisions under Section 17 of the Act of 2002
and the bye-laws and that they are the workmen under the
provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, Minimum Wages
Act, 1948 and the M.P. Industrial Employment (Standing
Orders) Act, 1961, no mandamus can be issued to the
respondents to regularize the services of Barbers and pay them
minimum wages.
The permission letter-dated 6.5.2002, filed as a specimen copy, though is stated by the petitioner as an appointment order, when given a close look, reveals that it is only a permission letter to perform Mundan within a premises. The permission is granted only after being registered. It is, thus, not an appointment letter. Thus, the Barbers enlisted on being registered are not engaged either as a workman or employee of the Committee or the Temple as would create any right in their favour or in the petitioner to seek direction to regularize their service or grant minimum wages.
In view whereof, the petition, being devoid of substance, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No costs.
(SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE vinod