Petitioners, casual labourers in Lakshadweep Panchayat, challenged dismissal of their claim for regularisation. Court applied prior judgments directing they approach the Industrial Disputes forum and disposed of the petition.
Petition disposed; petitioners directed to approach Industrial Disputes forum instead.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY ,THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WP(C).No. 5711 of 2015
PETITIONERS:
1 AMANULLA P.
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O.ABOOSALA K.P., PANDINODA HOUSE, COOK IN GOVT.HIGH SCHOOL, DISTRICT PANCHAYATH, KADAMATH ISLAND, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP-682556.
D/O.CHERIYA KOYA TT, KUPPINA CHETTA HOUSE, CLERK IN JAWAHARLAL SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL, DISTRICT PANCHAYATH, KADAMATH ISLAND, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP-682556.
BY ADV. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ
RESPONDENTS:
UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI-682555.
WP(C).No.5711 of 2015
2
BY ADVS. SRI.MANU.S, CGC, ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP SRI.MANU.S CGC ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LA
SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SC LAKSHADWEEP ADMN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.5711 of 2015
3
JUDGMENT
In this writ petition, the petitioners, who are Casual Labourers, are engaged in Village Panchayat in Lakshadweep. They are challenging the order issued by the Secretary (Panchayats), Directorate of Panchayats under the administration of the Union Territory of Lakshadweep in implementation of the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA.No.29 of 2013 and connected
cases. The case of the petitioners is that they have been continuing as Casual Labourers for several years for a period of 89 days each and continuing thereafter with a break.
2. I have already disposed of WP(C) No.5289 of 2015 in
which similar claim was raised by a batch of Casual Labourers as per judgment dated 20.8.2018 with the following findings
and directions:
“14. Therefore, the impugned scheme cannot be said to be illegal in any respect as already found in the judgment in W.P(c).No.27618 of 2017. Moreover, in the light of judgments (supra) relied on by the Learned Standing Counsel, starting from Umadevi's case, the petitioners who were selected by pick and choose method cannot have any valid claim for regularisation or continued engagement when several unemployed hands are awaiting appointments. Their cases are also liable to be considered for employment for 89 days as per their turn, once the register is prepared pursuant to Ext P26 order.
15. However, it is seen that the respondents are
WP(C).No.5711 of 2015
4
operating a single list for engaging persons for any employment, irrespective of the qualification requires or nature of employment. Such a procedure will cause unnecessary delay in providing employment/utilising the services of qualified hands at the earliest opportunity. I am of the view that preparation of separate lists for posts/employments which require special/technical qualification will be appropriate and it would serve the interest of employee as well as employer. Apart from avoiding delay in getting qualified hands, the aspirants for employment will have an idea about the possible intervals between each spell of their appointments. The respondents shall consider whether such separate list is necessary to avoid delay.
16. The learned Counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that in the light of the judgment in Paramanand v. Nagar Palika & others: (2003)9 SCC 290, the village Panchayat is an industry and the petitioners are workmen and therefore the respondents are bound to observe the provisions contained in Chapter VA of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act) and the right of the petitioners under the Industrial Disputes Act requires adjudication by this court. But I find that when there is a statutory forum to adjudicate the disputes under the ID Act, the petitioners would be free to approach it and this judgment will not stand in the way of adjudicating the same. With the above observations, these writ petitions are disposed of”.
The case of the petitioners would also be governed by
the said directions in that judgment.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA
JUDGE
WP(C).No.5711 of 2015
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER F NO.5/8/2014-DOP DT.12-2-2015 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF PANCHAYATS, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATS, KAVARATTI-682555. EXHIBIT P2 EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SCHOOL PRINCIPAL TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3 EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SCHOOL HEADMASTER TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DT.6-3-2014 IN OA 29/2013 AND CONNECTED CASES ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXHIBIT P5 EXT. P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DT.19-2-2015 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 5325/2015.
WP(C).No.5711 of 2015
6
APPENDIX
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R1(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR F.NO5/6/2003-DOP&RD DATED 12.11.2003
EXHIBIT R1(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE F.NO.5/26/2003-DOP7RD DATED 04.11.2008
EXHIBIT R1(c) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.08.2009 IN O.A NO.611/2008
EXHIBIT R1(d) A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN OP(CAT) NO.133 OF 2012 AND 606 OF 2012
JJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether casual labourers in Village Panchayat Lakshadweep entitled to regularisation pending Central Administrative Tribunal disposals.
Whether village Panchayat constitutes an industry under Industrial Disputes Act Chapter VA.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Umadevi's caseReferred¶36
Paramanand v. Nagar Palika & othersReferred¶41
Paramanand v. Nagar Palika & others
W.P(c) No. 27618 of 2017Referred¶36
W.P(C) No. 5289 of 2015Applied¶33
Amanulla P.
Houlath K.C.
Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep
Secretary of Panchayaths
Justice P.V.Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
