Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Oct 17, 2007
ePaper
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Wednesday, Oct 17, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has dismissed a batch of writ petitions and appeals filed by drivers and conductors, appointed as “casual ad hoc employees” in 2002, seeking regularisation of service. “Prima facie, we are of the view that the termination of service by non-renewal of contract cannot be regarded as alteration of service of the employee under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act,” held a Division Bench, comprising Justices K. Raviraja Pandian and Chitra Venkataraman. The Bench was passing orders on the writ appeals filed by the State Transport Corporation employees, who were disengaged by the Corporation though they had worked continuously for over 240 days. Further direction soughtAnother set of petitioners had sought a direction to authorities not to terminate their services, and for a further direction to appoint them in permanent vacancies before appointing any other persons. In their counter-affidavit, however, the authorities said the petitions were not maintainable, as an alternative remedy was available under the ID Act. They said the petitioners were engaged in casual temporary vacancies on contract basis for a fixed period. “No retrenchment”The termination, therefore, could not be regarded as retrenchment. According to the Corporations, the casual vacancies arose due to unforeseen circumstances like strikes, festivals and large-scale absenteeism. The Government had directed them to engage persons temporarily on contract basis for 25 days to cater to the needs of the public. In their order, the Judges said: “It is an admitted fact that the appellants and petitioners were not appointed as per the common service rules, which require that the Corporation has to fill up permanent vacancies only through employment exchange. It is also an admitted case that they have been appointed as casual ad hoc employee and no appointment order has been issued to them.” Noting that they sought regularisation only on the ground that they were in employment for more than the prescribed 240 days, the Judges said the Corporation maintained that the petitioners/appellants were engaged only for a period of 25 days. Describing it as a disputed question of fact, the Bench said in such matters no direction could be issued. It said the petitioners/appellants could establish their rights before the appropriate forum under the ID Act. It also recorded the fact that in all these cases the petitioners were appointed by Branch Managers without following common service rules. The officials were not the appointing authority, the Bench said, adding, “We are of the view that the termination of service by non-renewal of contract cannot be regarded as alteration of conditions of service of the employees under the ID Act.”
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2007, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
