0

Not providing labor permanency for 14 workmen is an unfair practice : Bombay HC

TITLE : Solapur Mahanagarpalika v Yogesh Nagnath Mane & Ors

CITATION : . CIVIL WP-14150-2023

CORAM : Hon’ble justice Milind N. Jadhav

DATE:  4th December, 2023

INTRODUCTION :

A writ petition was filed under Article 226 to challenge the judgement given by the Industrial Court.

FACTS :

The complainants were working as Malaria field workers with petitioner corporation since 1997-98. They were employed due to the issuance of advertisements in newspapers followed by interviews and wait listing.

Initially, they were paid a salary of Rs. 5000/- per month but thereafter they were paid salary on a daily wage basis. It was contended that the petitioner corporation had specific vacant posts of Field Workers. The field workers were given artificial breaks according to the petitioner company and in those breaks, the 14 workmen used to work.

However the benefit of permanency was not given to the current respondents when 2500 other employees were given job permanency. It was held by the labour industrial court that the company had indulged in an unfair practice.

COURT’S ANALYSIS

The court held that it is seen that the entire evidence on record clearly proves that all 14 original Complainants / workmen i.e. Respondents herein were in continuous service of the Petitioner Corporation since 1997-98 and all of then have worked with the Petitioner Corporation for more than 240 days in each year for more than 10 years even before filing of the present Complaint and are continuing to do so for the past 25 years and held the order passed by the industrial court is valid.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Sanjana Ravichandran

Click here to view judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *