EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF BHALGORA AREA (NOW KUSTORE AREA) OF M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD. versus WORKMEN BEING REPRESENTED BY JANTA MAZDOOR SANGH

Citation: [2021] 6 S.C.R. 77 · Decided: 07-09-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
77
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT
OF BHALGORA AREA (NOW KUSTORE AREA) OF
M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.
v.
WORKMEN BEING REPRESENTED BY
JANTA MAZDOOR SANGH
(Civil Appeal No. 4901 of 2021)
SEPTEMBER 07, 2021
[SANJAY KISHAN KAUL AND HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Labour Laws – Appointment – Illegal practices –
Management of a Government undertaking terminated 38 workmen
on the ground that they, in connivance with a Personnel Manager
and a Dealing Assistant, dishonestly secured appointments –
Industrial Tribunal concluded that the Management failed to
substantiate the charge of manipulated appointment – Concerned
workmen were directed to be reinstated with 50% back wages –
Single Bench of High Court allowed writ petition in favour of the
Management – LPA – Division Bench however decided in favour
of the workmen – On appeal, held: The appointees did not figure
in either of the lists, sponsored by the jurisdictional Employment
Exchange and were beneficiaries of a fraudulent process –
Moreover, the contradictory stand of the workmen at different
stages would suggest that they were conscious and aware of being
appointed through a non-bonafide process – In any case, the
appointments were contrary to the requirements of the 1959 Act –
Fraudulent practice to gain public employment cannot be
countenanced to be permitted by a Court of law – The sanctity of
public employment, as a measure of social welfare and a significant
source of social mobility, must be protected against such fraudulent
process which manipulates and corrupts the selection process –
The Courts as sentinel of justice must strive to ensure that
employment programmes are not manipulated by deceitful
middlemen, thereby setting up a parallel mechanism of Faustian
Bargain – One cannot condone false projections so as to
circumvent the statutorily prescribed procedure for appointments
– Such illegal practices must be interdicted by the Courts –
   [2021] 6 S.C.R. 77
77
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
78
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 6 S.C.R.
Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act,
1959.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1. The Single Judge of the High Court should not
have been overruled by the impugned judgment by ignoring the
key fact that the appointees did not figure in either of the lists,
sponsored by the jurisdictional Employment Exchange and that
they were beneficiaries of a fraudulent process. Enough materials
were presented to the Tribunal to justify the action against the
illegally appointed workmen, and as such the appellants cannot
be made to suffer the consequence of the misconduct of their
two errant employees against whom, disciplinary actions were
taken by the Management. Moreover, the contradictory stand
of the workmen at different stages would suggest that they were
conscious and aware of being appointed through a non-bonafide
process. In any case, the appointments were contrary to the
requirements of the the Employment Exchange (Compulsory
Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959. [Para 14][83-H; 84-A-B]
2. Fraudulent practice to gain public employment cannot
be countenanced to be permitted by a Court of law. The
workmen here, having hoodwinked the Government
Undertaking in a fraudulent manner, must be prevented from
enjoying the fruits of their illgotten advantage. The sanctity of
public employment, as a measure of social welfare and a
significant source of social mobility, must be protected against
such fraudulent process which manipulates and corrupts the
selection process. Employment schemes floated by the State for
targeted groups, can absorb a finite number of workmen. To
abuse the legitimate process therefore would mean deprivation
of employment benefits to rightful beneficiaries. The Courts as
sentinel of justice must strive to ensure that such employment
programmes are not manipulated by deceitful middlemen,
thereby setting up a parallel mechanism of Faustian Bargain.
Often, desperate job aspirants’ resort to such measures to
compete for limited vacancies, but this Court cannot condone
false projections so as to circumvent the statutorily prescribed
procedure for appointments. Such illegal practices must be
interdicted by the Courts. [Para 17][85-E-H; 86-A]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
79
3. The reversal of the well-reasoned order of the Single
Judge is found to be unjustified. The LPA judgment is set aside
and the decision of the Single Judge is restored. [Para 18][86-
B]
Union of India v. M.Bhaskaran, (1995) Supp. 4 SCC
100 : [1995]

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.