PASSED BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT AT ANNEXURE-M, AND DECLARE THAT BADLI
WORKERS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ADVANCE AND EXGRATIA
AS PER SETTLEMENT DATED ... Probationers; 3.
Trainees; 4. Apprentices; 5. Badli workmen; 6. Contract
Labour and 7. Contract Security. Badli workers are workers,
who work in leave vacancies
produced at Annexure-N.
2. Union of Badli workers had filed a complaint dated 22.3.2011
interalia alleging the violation of the Standing Order Clause ... alleging that, there are about more than 300 Badli
workers working in the petitioner - industry, instead of regularising
their services, the Management has indulged
Court is that the petitioner was working as a Badli. The petitioner, a badli worker will be in the Badli workers list and he will ... permanent employee of the second respondent. The term "Badli Worker" has been set out in relation to a textile worker which
Division Bench in that case is that the concept of a badli worker implies that he is given work only when some permanent worker ... badli is employed on a particular day or on a particular number of days and there is no further right of badli worker
first and second
party, and that on such permanent posts, badli workers who is either
senior most or is selected to fill the said post ... that operation of the order
directing the mill to allow badli workers on seniority or selection
to work against permanent post is made inoperative until
long and
harrowing wait in the panel of " Badli Workers" ever since his entry in the panel, prepared and
maintained on the Original ... Court."
The petitioner claims that he was working as a Badli Worker engaged by the
administration of this Court. His case is that
applicable to the
permanent employees, badli workers,
work charge established and temporary
workers, but not to the casual workers.
There will be no recruitment against ... permanent employees, badli workers,
work charge established and temporary
workers but not to the casual workers. It is
clarified that such workers, if made
permanent
continue in service. Had the petition-
er been a bad worker, his services would have been dis-
pensed with by the officials of the State
towards the period of service
petitioner--workman as Badli worker from "
30.10.1972 and not granting interes't"'o1;«
only issue that
status of the Respondent No.3 to that of a
casual/badli worker, the learned counsel relying on "Karnataka State
Road Transport Corporation
