PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR. versus SUDESH KUMAR PURI

Citation: [2007] 2 S.C.R. 409 · Decided: 09-02-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

> 
-~ 
PUNJAB STA TE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
SUDESH KUMAR PURI 
FEBRUARY 9, 2007 
[DR. ARIJIT PASA Y AT AND TARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.] 
B 
-+ 
Industrial Disputes Act, /947-s.2(oo)(hb)-Applicability of-Person 
--,. 
engaged as private Meter Reader on contract basis-Payment made at fixed 
rate on basis of number of meters read-On expiry of contract period, services c 
dispensed with-Held: Engagement being for specific period and conditional, 
s.2(oo)(bb) was clearly· applicable. 
Appellant-Board engaged Respondent as a private Meter' Reader on 
contract basis. During the period of contract, Respondent was paid a sum of 
Re. 1 for each meter reading. At the expiry of contract period, and in view of D 
appointment of regular Meter Readers, services oHtespondent were dispensed 
' 
with . 
..... -1 
The Labour Court held that Respondent had worked in the capacity of a 
Meter Reader for a considerably long period; that he had completed service 
of more than 240 days within the preceding twelve months, and he having E 
been retrenched without following the procedure provided under s.25-F of the 
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was entitled to be re-instated. The High Court 
upheld the order of re-instatement holding that the contract was a camouflage 
by the Appellant-Board with a view to avoid the provisions of the Industrial 
-~ 
Disputes Act, 1947. Hence the present appeals. 
F 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: There was an agreement gQ.verning engagement. The payment 
was made per meter reading at a fixed rate and there was no regular 
employment ever offered to any of the respondents. The material on record G 
'' 
clearly established that the engagement of the respondent was for specific 
~-
period and conditional. I~ appears that on the appointment of regular meter 
readers, the engagement has been dispensed with. The contracts clearly 
governed the terms of engagement. The provisions of Section 2( oo )(bb) of the 
Act clearly applies to the facts of the present case. Above being the position, 
409 
H 
>( 
410 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 2 S.C.R. 
A the orders passed by the Labour Court and the High Court are clearly 
... 
,J_ -
untenable and are quashed. (Paras 7, 9 & 10] (411-G-H; 412-D-E] 
Steel Authority of India Ltd. And Ors. v. National Union Waterfront 
Workers and Ors., (2001] 7 SCC 1, distinguished. 
B 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 648 of2007. 
From the final Judgment and Order dated 21.3.2005 of the High Court 
of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, in C.W.P. No. 18634/2003. 
_.+... 
-.. 
WITH 
c 
C.A. Nos. 649, 650 and 651 of2007. 
Jayshree Anand, Karunakar Mahalik and Ashwani Bhardwaj for the 
Appellants. 
!;..-
D 
R.K. Kapoor, M.K. Verma and Anis Ahmed Khan for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
j 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. 1. Leave granted. 
j-..... 
E 
2. Challenge in these appeals is to the consolidated orders passed by 
the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing the four 
writ petitions filed by the appellant No. I-Punjab State Electricity Board (in 
short the 'Board'). The respondent in each case was engaged as Meter 
Reader on contract basis by the appellant-Board. After disengagement he 
made a claim stating that he had worked for a considerably long continuous 
F period, his services have been terminated by the Board without following any 
procedure and without payment of retrenchment compensation. Claim for 
reinstatement with back wages was made. On failure of the conciliation 
proceedings, matter was referred by the concerned State Government to the 
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as the 'Labour 
G 
Court') under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the 
'Act'). Stand of the appellant before the Labour Court was that the applicant 
was engaged as private Meter Reader on contract basis which was renewed 
'. 
on two occasions and at the expiry of the contract period, the services have 
+< 
been dispensed with. It was specifically averred that the applicant concerned 
had never been employed by the Board and was not a workman under the 
H provisions of the Act. During the concerned period a sum of Re. I/- for 
; 
PUNJAB ST A TE ELECTRICITY BOARD v. SUD ESH KUMAR PURI [PASAYA T, J.] 
411 
reading was paid as per the contract. There was neither any month_ly salary A 
nor the claimant could be treated as a person appointed by the Board. 
3. The Labour Court held that

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