Indian Airlines Ltd v. UOI & Ors

VEENA BIRBAL, J.

June 3rd , 2011 ssb

* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: June 3rd, 2011 + W.P.(C) 545/2006 National Aviation Company of India Ltd(NACIL)..... Petitioner Through:Mr.Lalit Bhasin with Ms.Ratna Dhingra & Ms.Shreya Sharma,Advocates -versus- Government of India & Ors ..... Respondents Through:Mr.Sachin Datta with Mr. Abhimanya Kumar, Advocates for respondent no.1. Mr. Ashok Agarwal with Mr.Anuj Agarwal for respondent no.3. CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes Veena Birbal, J 1. By way of this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ seeking quashing of impugned order of reference dated 3rd October, 2005 under section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as `the I.D Act') passed by the Ministry of Labour i.e Government of India. The impugned reference order reads as under:- "Whether the termination of services of Shri Ravinder Chandra and 42 others by the Management of Indian Airlines Ltd. is legal and justified? If not, to what relief they are entitled to?" Petitioner has also challenged the subsequent notice dated 10th October, 2005 issued in the aforesaid reference by Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, New Delhi i.e. respondent no.2. Respondent no.3 is the employees union representing the workmen. 2. Background of the case as alleged in the petition is as under:- In order to fill up certain vacancies on regular basis in the category of Helper (Engg.), Helper (Stores), Helper (Commercial) etc, a notification was issued in the year 1988- 1989 inviting applications for the same and panels were prepared in the year 1990 after following the provisions of Recruitment & Promotion Rules of Indian Airlines Ltd. The validity of these panels was for a period of two years and the candidates were offered appointment in terms of their merit on the panel as and when the vacancies arose. The validity of panels finally expired on 15.7.1994. In the year 1994-95, a large number of writ petitions were filed by different categories of casual workers praying for regularization of their services in Indian Airlines Ltd. On 7th December, 1995, in CWP No. 4113/94 titled S.K. Saini and Indian Airlines Ltd. i.e. this court vide its interim order dated 7.12.95 directed the petitioner to prepare a panel for engaging casual workers on a daily rated basis in different categories from amongst the casuals who had worked with petitioner on daily rated basis. Pursuant to the said order, panels were formed and the petitioner started engaging workers from those panels. On 9th May, 1997, the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of along with other connected writ petitions wherein petitioner was directed to engage casuals on a daily rated basis as per its requirement firstly from the panel prepared and approved on 20th November, 1990, as such, persons engaged on a daily rated basis pursuant to the interim order dated 7th December, 1995 had to be discontinued and the persons whose names were borne on the panel formulated in the year 1990 were offered appointment on casual basis. Subsequently, SLP being SLP No. 16392-16399/97 were filed by the workers challenging the aforesaid order. The same was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 15th September, 1997. Thereafter, another batch of 25 writ petitions was filed by the casuals in the year 1997-98 praying for regularization wherein WP(C) 2644/1997 was the lead case. The claim of the workers in the said petitions for regularization was dismissed vide order dated 21st August, 1998. By the said order, this court also directed the petitioner to consider the persons who have been continuously been engaged on casual daily rated basis by virtue of interim order or otherwise