The Hindu Business Line : GO on re-employment of retrenched workers upheld

Chennai May 6 The Madras High Court has upheld a GO MS No 41 Transport (C.1) department dated July 13, 2006, ordering preference, in appointment of drivers and conductors by TN State Transport Corporation, to persons who were retrenched from service but obtained orders from the High Court for re-employment, and to similarly placed persons who had approached the court and whose cases were still under consideration.

Pleas dismissed

Dismissing writ petitions by drivers challenging the impugned order, Mr Justice K. Chandru ruled that the challenge would have to fail as they had already approached this court with a binding order and they could not reopen the said issue on the strength of the GO Ms. No 41.

Under ID ACT

The order of the transport corporation did not suffer from any illegality or irregularity and interpretation found in the impugned order of the corporation was fully in consonance with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act.

The judge said that looking at the GO, it was clear that the respondent State could not give preference on ground that the case of similarly placed persons, who had approached the court, which was still under consideration, and also preference to those whose services were terminated and was similarly placed like persons mentioned in the GO and who had not approached the court but approached the managing directors of the transport corporations seeking similar appointment.

These two decisions were not only contrary to the ID Act but would also be unconstitutional and would become a source of corruption.

In view of the dispute over the claims of workers, they would have to approach the appropriate labour court to establish the total number of days worked by them and that their subsequent non-employment and their claim preference for re-employment was guaranteed under Section 25H of the ID Act.

Though the object of the first respondent (Secretary, Transport Dept) in issuing the GO dated 13.7.06 might be inevitable, but with reference to certain stipulations, the said exercise could not be undertaken by the second respondent (TN State Transport Corpn, Madurai) until further orders were passed by this court in cases which were pending consideration, or in other cases, workmen got the declaration from the labour court.

The petitioners prayed for quashing the letter dated 18.9.06 of the third respondent (TN State Transport Corpn, Wannarpet, Tirunelveli Dt) and further direct respondents to implement the GO Ms No 41 dated 13.7.06.

The judge dismissed the petitions.

More Stories on : Human Resources | Courts/Legal Issues | Tamil Nadu

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
`Jet, Air India, Air Deccan interested in A380'

A380 arrives on maiden visit

MDLR to fly into more cities

AI finalises seat supply deal for Dreamliner

Pilot-less, ports flounder

Shippers' hopes belied

EU's move to limit climate change

Sri Lankan shipments hit

IT solutions for Mumbai airport

GO on re-employment of retrenched workers upheld

Dept of Post wants its `commercial' tag removed

Finding a way through airport congestion

India has `high potential' but many `infrastructure challenges'

East Coast Rly plans new station