Petitioners, absorbed contract labourers, sought direction to extend service and pecuniary benefits from 1996-1997. The court directed respondents to dispose of a pending representation regarding these benefits.
Directing respondents to dispose of representation dated 15.11.2019 as expeditiously as possible.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI WRIT PETITION No.19339 of 2019
ORDER:
Petitioners seek a direction to respondents to extend the service benefits with effect from 06.12.1996 and pecuniary benefits with effect from 09.12.1997 as per B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998.
Petitioners’ case is that they worked as contract labourers in the respondent – Corporation till they were absorbed into service; vide G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 23.09.1996, the Government issued notification prohibiting engagement of contract labour; respondent – Corporation has taken a policy decision to absorb the contract labour working in abolished categories vide BPMS.No.37 dated 18.05.1997; thereafter, as per the guidelines issued vide BPMS.No.272 dated 31.12.1997, those who are on rolls as on 18.05.1997 and working in abolished categories, were directed to be absorbed; they were absorbed into service in July, 1999, and are entitled to service benefits with effect from 06.12.1996 and monetary benefits from 09.12.1997, as contemplated under B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998. When employees, who were similarly situated as that of petitioners, were denied service benefits as contemplated under B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998, they filed W.P.No.2179 of 2006, which was allowed on 19.11.2010 directing the respondents to extend
the benefits of B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998
notwithstanding their absorption in service under subsequent memo dated 15.04.2002. Similarly situated employees filed W.P.No.12747 of 2012, and the said writ petition was allowed on 16.07.2018 recording the undertakings given by the petitioners to forego the seniority and extended the benefit of B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998 without counting their service for seniority and W.A.No.1745 of 2018 filed there against was dismissed. Petitioners state they are also similarly situated to that of petitioners in W.P.No.12747 of 2012 and submitted representation dated 15.11.2019, enclosing their undertakings that they would not claim seniority and the said representation is not being disposed of. Hence the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, following the ratio laid down in W.P.No.2179 of 2006 dated 19.11.2010, the respondents may be directed to dispose of representation dated 15.11.2019 extending the benefit of B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998 to the petitioners notwithstanding the absorption in service under subsequent memo dated 15.04.2002.
In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to dispose of representation dated 15.11.2019 made by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, strictly in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
_________________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J
Dt: 02.12.2019 usd
2 issues framed by the court
Whether respondents should be directed to dispose of the petitioners' representation regarding back-dated service and pecuniary benefits.
Whether petitioners, who were contract labourers absorbed into service, are entitled to benefits under B.P.Ms.No.326 dated 14.03.1998.
Petitioners
Respondent – Corporation
Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
