Bombay High Court: Long-Term Engagement of Daily Wage Watchmen Amounts to Unfair Labour Practice.

Headnote:

The Bombay High Court dismissed a batch of Letters Patent Appeals filed by the Forest Development Corporation of Maharashtra, upholding the grant of permanency to watchmen who had been continuously employed on daily wages for several years despite performing permanent and perennial work. The Court held that such prolonged engagement on daily wages after completion of 240 days of service constitutes an unfair labour practice under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971.

Background:

• The respondent watchmen were engaged by the Forest Development Corporation of Maharashtra on a daily wage basis and continued to work uninterruptedly for several years.

• Despite completing more than 240 days of service every year and discharging duties of a permanent nature, they were denied regular status and permanency.

• The Industrial Court allowed their complaints under the MRTU & PULP Act and directed grant of permanency with consequential benefits.

• The Corporation’s challenge before the Single Judge was dismissed, leading to the filing of the present Letters Patent Appeals.

Court’s Observations:

• The Corporation continued to extract work of a permanent and perennial nature while keeping the employees on daily wages for decades.

• Completion of 240 days of service year after year creates a legitimate expectation of permanency under labour welfare legislation.

• Absence of sanctioned posts cannot be used as a defence to justify unfair labour practices.

• The Forest Development Corporation qualifies as an “industry”, and the respondents fall within the definition of “workmen” under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

• Prolonged denial of permanency despite continuous service was held to be a clear case of unfair labour practice.

Decision

The Division Bench found no perversity in the findings of the Industrial Court or the Single Judge and dismissed all the Letters Patent Appeals. The directions granting permanency and consequential service benefits to the watchmen were upheld.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

• Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 – Unfair labour practices

• Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Definition of “industry” and “workman”

• Article 226, Constitution of India – Writ jurisdiction of High Courts