LexONGC LTD. versus PETROLEUM COAL LABOUR UNION & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c [2015] 5 S.C.R. 474 ONGCLTD. V. PETROLEUM COAL LABOUR UNION & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 3727 of 2015) APRIL 17,2015 [V. GOPALA GOWDAAND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Regularisation- Claim for - Appointment of workmen by Corporation initially through contractors, subsequently, through Co-operative Society - Thereafter, policy decision by the Corporation to entrust security D work to Cl SF to protect their installations - During pendency of the sanction from Central Government of the policy decision, Corporation issuing memorandum of appointment directly to each one of the concerned workmen on term basis and thereafter, employed continuously without written orders by the Corporation E - Workmen claiming regularization of services in the Corporation - Award passed by the tribunal directing the Corporation to regularize the services of the workmen since they had completed 480 days of work as required - Said award upheld by the High Court- On appeal, held: Order passed by the High Court is legal F and valid - Policy decision is neither valid nor applicable- Certified Standing Order of Corporation apply to the workmen and overrides the policy decision - Workmen have acquired their right to be regularised as per the Act as well as the provision of cl 2(ii) of the G 'Certified Standing Orders since they have rendered more than 240 days of service in a calendar year from the date of the memorandum of appointment issued- It would be unjust and unfair to deny them regularisation in their posts for the error committed by the Corporation in the procedure to appoint them in the posts- H Their appointment in their posts and continuing them in their 474 0.N.GC. v. PETROLEUM COAL LABOUR UNION 475 services definitely cannot be termed as illegal, at best it can be A called irregular- Even though plea is not taken regarding unfair labour practice being committed by the Corporation, the Labour Court/High Court have got the power to record the finding of fact to ensure that there shall be effective adjudication of the industrial dispute- Thus, the Corporation to regularize the services of the B workmen and pay their back wages and other benefits- Certified Standing Orders for Contingent Employees of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission. Dismissing the appeal, the Court c HELD: 1.1 The tribunal rightly adjudicated the P.oint as regards jurisdiction of the tribunal to direct the Corporation to regularize the services of the con.cerned workmen in the posts, on the basis of the facts, D circumstances and evidence on record and passed an award directing the Corporation that the services of the concerned workmen should be regularized. The submission that the tribunal has no power to pass such an award compelling the Corporation to regularise the services of the concerned E workmen is wholly untenable in law. [Para 26] [495-C-E] 1.2 The plea of the Corporation t.hat the reason for not regularising the concerned workmen under the Certified Standing Orders of the Corporation is allegedly due to the. F fact that the appointment of the concerned workmen was made without following due procedure under the Recruitment Rules and that their appointments were illegal, cannot be accepted since the Corporation cannot deny the G rights of the workmen by taking the plea that their initial appointment was contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Though due procedure was not followed by the Corporation for the appointment of the concerned workmen, this does not disentitle them of their right to seek H 476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2015] 5 S.C.R. A regularisation of their services by the Corporation under the provisions of the Certified Standing Orders, after they have rendered more than 240 days of service in a calendar year from the date of the memorandum of appointment issued to each one of the concerned workmen in the year 1988. The B alleged "policy decision" to appoint CISF personnel to the security post is on deputation basis and cannot be called appointment per se. Whereas, the concerned workmen have acquired their right to be regularised under the provision of C Clause 2(ii) of the 'Certified Standing Orders for Contingent Employees of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission'. [Para 28, 29) [503-A-C, E-H] D Ajaypa/ Singh v. Haryana Warehousing Corporation 2014 (13) SCALE 636 - relied on. 1.3 For the Corporation to implement a provision which a
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.