Writ petition challenged an Industrial Tribunal Award reinstating a respondent as a permanent employee. The court held the appointment was purely contractual and ended with the ministers' tenure, allowing the petition and setting aside the Award.
Award passed in I.D.No.64/2011 is set aside; no order as to costs.
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.
• i.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AIVIAR/| (Special Original Jurisdiction)
. TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 10949 OF 2015
Between:
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate order or direction, declaring the I.D. No. 64/ 2011 on the file of the Chairman Cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Anantapur, dated 27-11-2014 is arbitrary, unreasonable and illegal and set aside the same.
4
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 14466 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in I.D. No. 64/2011 on the file of the Chairman Cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Anantapur, dated 27-11-2014 and pending disposal of main writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M KARIBASAIAH
Counsel for the Respondent 3: GP FOR LABOUR (AP)
Counsel for the Respondent 2: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE (AP)
Counsel for the Respondent 1: SRI M.VISWANATHAM, ADVOCATE
The Court made the following: order
a.
I
I-
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No. 10949 of 2015
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
“...to issue a writ in. the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate order or direction, declaring the I.D.No.64/2011 on the file of the Chairman Cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Cum. Labour Court, Anantapur, dated 27.11.2014 is arbitrary, unreasonable and illegal and set aside the aame ....”
2. The brief facts of the case are that, the writ petition is filed challenging the Award passed by the Labour Court, Anantapur vide I.D.No.64/2011 dated 27.11.2014, wherein the Labour Court passed the following order:
“...In the result, the oral termination of the petitioner that is ordered by the respondents 1 and 2 is set aside and the respondents 1 and 2 are directed tp reinstate the petitioner into service within one month from the date of publication of the Award. The petitioner is not entitled for continuity of service or back-wages.”
2
Labour Court is bad in law and further the learned counsel for the petitioners though not raised such as a ground before the Labour Court have orally stated before this Court that the petitioners being a college does not come under the provisions•visions ofof the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court and as such the Labour Court does not have jurisdiction to pass such an Award directing the petitioners to reinstate, the 1* respondent into service.
“12. For the reasons given above, we are of the opinion that the appointment of the respondents was a pure
a.
3
and simple contractual appointment and that such appointment does not attract and is outside the purview of the Bombay Civil Service Rules, 1959. Since the tenure of the ministers at whose instance and on whose. • recommendation they were appointed has come to an end with 10.12.1989 their service also pame to an end simultaneously. No order of termination as such was necessary for putting an end to their service, much less a' prior notice. They ought to go out in the manner they have come in.”
Miscellaneous petitions pending. if any, in this Writ
Petition shall stand closed.
\
That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above witness the Mon’ble Sri Prashant Kumar Mishra, The Chief Justice on this Tuesday, The Eighteenth day of April, Two Thousand Twenty Three.
SD/- T. MADHAVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To,
GSR
GSR
HIGH COURT
VSJ
DATED: 18/04/2023
ORDER
WP.No.10949 of 2015
S 0 t SFP
Curie.ii y-
ALLOWED OFWP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a temporary contract employee appointment falls outside the purview of the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court jurisdiction when the tenure of the appointing ministers ended?
Whether a Labour Court Award directing reinstatement of a temporary appointee can be set aside on grounds of illegality and lack of jurisdiction?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Gujarat and Ors. vs. P.J.Kampavat and Ors., Civil Appeal Nos. 1826-37 of 1992 dated 28.04.1992Explained¶40
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Government College Hostel, Anantapur
V. Venkateswarlu
The District Social Welfare Officer, Anantapur
The Chairperson-Cum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Anantapur
V. Sujatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
