This writ petition challenged the Industrial Court's rejection of an injunction against demotion. The High Court dismissed the petition, upholding that conditional temporary promotion was valid under relevant Rules and Government Resolution, and found no unfair labour practice despite the temporary nature of the appointment.
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.
12-W.P-1237-2017
1
Shailaja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1237 OF 2017
Smt. Mangala Gawali ] Petitioner Vs. Zilla Parishad, Solapur & Ors. ] Respondents
Ms. Seema Sarnaik, for petitioner.
…... CORAM : R.G. KETKAR, J. DATE : 24th JULY, 2017. P.C .
Heard Ms. Seema Sarnaik, learned Counsel for the petitioner at length.
2 12-W.P-1237-2017
contended that the petitioner was appointed as 'Arogya Sevika' on 8th September, 1997. The petitioner belongs to 'Kokana Community' which is recognized as a scheduled tribe. She had produced her Caste validity certificate on 22nd June, 2006. She was promoted as 'Arogya Sahayika' by order dated 15th October, 2011. Smt. C.B. Kale and Smt. M.B. Uike though are senior to the complainant and belong to backward class, they did not produce Caste validity certificate. She submitted that it is only when these two ladies produced Caste certificate, respondents intended to demote the complainant from the post of 'Arogya Sahayika' to the post of 'Arogya Sevika'. She submitted that complainant is continuously working on the post of 'Arogya Sahayika' for 4 to 5 years. During this period, she has also acquired requisite qualification for appointment to the post of 'Arogya Sahayika'. The Tribunal, however, rejected the application on the ground that; [1]Order of promotion dated 15th October, 2011 was issued by imposing conditions and it was a temporary promotion till such time, two senior employees obtain Caste Validity Certificate. [2]the complainant suppressed material facts.
She submitted that though the complainant had produced order of promotion dated 15th October, 2011 along with the complaint Tribunal held that the complainant has suppressed material facts and did not come to the Court with clean hands. She submitted that this finding is wholly unsustainable.
3 12-W.P-1237-2017
[Arogya Sevika] on 8th September, 1997 and she belongs to Kokana Community which is a scheduled tribe. She has obtained Caste Validity Certificate on 22nd June, 2006. As senior employees Smt. Kale and Smt. Uike did not produce Caste Validity Certificate, she was temporarily promoted by order dated 15th October, 2011. A perusal of that order shows that reference is made to Appendix-V-A of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads District Services [Recruitment] Rules, 1967 [for short 'Rules']. Rule-5 thereof lays down qualifications and methods of appointment as specified in Appendices IV-XII. Appendix-5-A deals with posts of Health Supervisor, Health Assistant and Health Worker. Order also refers to Government Resolution dated 16th June, 2008 issued by General Administration Department. The said Government Resolution provides that in case employees belonging to reserved category cannot be promoted for want of Caste Validity Certificates, junior employee next to the concerned employee may temporarily be promoted for 11 months subject to following conditions:
4 12-W.P-1237-2017
5 12-W.P-1237-2017
her temporary promotion given by the respondents subject to terms and conditions. The Tribunal, therefore, held that complainant had concealed the material facts. The complainant does not have prima facie case, balance of convenience does not lie in her favour and that she will not suffer heavy loss as in future she can be considered for promotional post of Arogya Sahayika.
12-W.P-1237-2017
6
16 and 17. Prima facie, I do not find any merit in this submission. Promotion was given to the complainant on the basis of Appendix5-A of the Rules as also Government Resolution dated 16th June, 2008. The Tribunal has considered that posts cannot be kept vacant on account of senior employees not producing Caste Validity Certificate and in order to meet this exigency, Appendix-5A as also Government Resolution provide promotion on temporary and ad-hoc basis. In view thereof, prima facie, I do not find any merit in the submission of Ms. Sarnaik that there is commission of unfair labour practice as per Items No. 6,9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Act. Hence, Petition fails and the same is dismissed. The Tribunal will decide the complaint on the basis of evidence on record and on its own merits and in accordance with law uninfluenced by the observations made herein. Order accordingly.
[R.G. KETKAR, J.]
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Industrial Court's order dismissing the petitioner's application for injunction to restrain demotion from Arogya Sahayika to Arogya Sevika.
Whether temporary promotion granted to the petitioner in the absence of caste validity certificates from senior employees amounts to unfair labour practice under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade U
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shailaja Mangala Gawali
Zilla Parishad, Solapur
R.G. Ketkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
