text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
This case involves 31 employees Ratio |
A distinction is sought to be made by Dr. Dhawan that out of them 27 had been appointed to a project and not in a project Ratio |
The distinction although appears to be attractive at the first blush but does not stand a moment's scrutiny Ratio |
As noticed hereinbefore, the High Court's observation remained unchallenged, that the project was to be financed by ODA Ratio |
The project was indisputably to be executed by the Indore Development Authority; and for the implementation thereof, the appointments had to be made by it Ratio |
If the Appellants were appointed for the purpose of the project, they would be deemed to have been appointed therefor and only because such appointments had been made by the Respondent would by itself not entitle them to claim permanency Ratio |
The life of the project came to an end on 30.6.1997 Ratio |
The maintenance job upon completion thereof had been taken over by Indore Municipal Corporation Ratio |
The Appellants were aware of the said fact and, thus, raised an alternative plea in their statements of claims Ratio |
The Labour Court could not have granted any relief to them as prayed for, as Indore Municipal Corporation is a separate juristic person having been created under a statute Ratio |
Such a relief would have been beyond the scope and purport of the reference made to the Labour Court by the State Government Ratio |
Furthermore, the Indore Municipal Corporation was not a party and, thus, no employee could be thrust upon it without its consent Ratio |
In A Umarani 2004 Indlaw SC 606 (supra), this Court held that once the employees are employed for the purpose of the scheme, they do not acquire any vested right to continue after the project is over PRE |
See also Karnataka State Coop PRE |
Apex Bank Ltd PRE |
Vs PRE |
Y.S. Shetty and Others, (2000) 10 SCC 179 1999 Indlaw SC 2211 and M.D. U.P. Land Development Corporation and Another Vs PRE |
Amar Singh and Others, (2003) 5 SCC 388 2003 Indlaw SC 331 PRE |
It is furthermore evident that the persons appointed as daily wagers held no posts Ratio |
The appointments, thus, had been made for the purpose of the project which, as indicated hereinbefore, came to an end Ratio |
The plea of Dr. Dhawan to the effect that the Appellants in Civil Appeal Ratio |
No. 337 of 2002 were asked to perform other duties also may not be of much significance having regard to our foregoing findings Ratio |
However, it has been seen that even services of one of them had been requisitioned only for the project work Ratio |
The High Court, in our opinion, was right in arriving at the conclusion that the Appellants were not entitled to be regularized in service Ratio |
ADVERSE INFERENCE Ratio |
Some documents were said to have been called for from the Respondents which are said to have been not produced Ratio |
One of such documents was offers of appointment Ratio |
The witness examined on behalf of the Respondents, although at one stage stated that the appointment letters had been issued to them, upon going through the records brought with him, however, asserted that no such appointment letter was issued Ratio |
Had the letters of appointment been issued, the Appellants themselves could have produced the same Ratio |
They did not do so Ratio |
It is accepted at the Bar, when the endorsement on the application filed by Om Prakash Mondloi was shown that the appointment letters were not issued Ratio |
We do not know the relevance of other documents called for for determining the issue Ratio |
If a document was called for in absence of any pleadings, the same was not relevant Ratio |
In absence of any pleadings, the Appellants could not have called for any document to show that the provisions of the 1961 Act and 1963 Rules would apply Ratio |
Before the High Court as also before us, the Appellants have produced a large number of documents which were not filed before the Labour Court Ratio |
Such additional documents had been kept out of consideration by the High Court as also by us Ratio |
We have referred to the said fact only for the purpose of showing that it would not be correct to contend that the Appellants had no access to the said documents Ratio |
An adverse inference need not necessarily be drawn only because it would be lawful to do so Ratio |
The Labour Court did not draw any adverse inference Ratio |
Such a plea was not even raised before the High Court Ratio |
Recently in M.P. Electricity Board vs. Hariram etc. [2004 AIR SCW 5476 PRE |
2004 Indlaw SC 829, this Court observed : "In such a factual background, in our opinion, the Industrial Court or the High Court could not have drawn an adverse inference for the non-production of the Muster Rolls for the year 1990 to 1992 in the absence of specific pleading by the respondents-applicants that at least d... |
The application calling for the production of the documents was for the years 1987 to 1992 PRE |
As stated above, between the period 1987 to 1990, as a matter of fact, till end of the year 1990 the respondents have not been able to establish the case of continuous work for 240 days PRE |
Considering these facts in our view drawing of an adverse inference for the non- production of the Muster Rolls for the years 1991-92, is wholly erroneous on the part of the Industrial Court and the High Court PRE |
We cannot but bear in mind the fact that the initial burden of establishing the factum of their continuous work for 240 days in a year rests with the applicants-respondents PRE |
The above burden having not been discharged and the Labour Court having held so, in our opinion, the Industrial Court and the High Court erred in basing an order of re-instatement solely on an adverse inference drawn erroneously PRE |
At this stage it may be useful to refer to a judgment of this Court in the case of Muncipal Corporation, Faridabad vs. Siri Niwas (JT 2004 (7) SC 248) 2004 Indlaw SC 719 wherein this Court disagreed with the High Court's view of drawing an adverse inference in regard to the non-production of certain relevant documents ... |
This is what this Court had to say in that regard PRE |
A Court of Law even in a case where provisions of the Indian Evidence Act apply, may presume or may not presume that if a party despite possession of the best evidence had not produced the same, it would have gone against his contentions PRE |
The matter, however, would be different where despite direction by a court the evidence is withheld PRE |
Presumption as to adverse inference for non- production of evidence is always optional and one of the factors which is required to be taken into consideration in the background of facts involved in the lis PRE |
The presumption, thus, is not obligatory because notwithstanding the intentional non- production, other circumstances may exist upon which such intentional non-production may be found to be justifiable on some reasonable grounds PRE |
In the instant case, the Industrial Tribunal did not draw any adverse inference against the Appellant PRE |
It was within its jurisdiction to do so particularly having regard to the nature of the evidence adduced by the Respondent PRE |
In any event, in this case, we have proceeded on the basis that the assertions of the Appellants as regard nature of their employment, their continuance in the job for a long time are correct and as such the question as to whether any adverse inference should be drawn for alleged production of documents called for woul... |
EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK Ratio |
The Appellants having been employed on daily wages did not hold any post Ratio |
No post was sanctioned by the State Government Ratio |
They were not appointed in terms of the provisions of the statute Ratio |
They were not, therefore, entitled to take the recourse of the doctrine of 'equal pay for equal work' as adumbrated in Arts Ratio |
14 and 39(d) of the Constitution of India Ratio |
The burden was on the Appellants to establish that they had a right to invoke the said doctrine in terms of Art Ratio |
14 of the Constitution of India Ratio |
For the purpose of invoking the said doctrine, the nature of the work and responsibility attached to the post are some of the factors which were bound to be taken into consideration Ratio |
Furthermore, when their services had not been regularized and they had continued on a consolidated pay on ad hoc basis having not undergone the process of regular appointments, no direction to give regular pay scale could have been issued by the Labour Court Ratio |
See Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology and Another vs. Manoj K. Mohanty (2003) 5 SCC 188 2003 Indlaw SC 348 Ratio |
In State of Haryana and Another vs. Tilak Raj and Others [(2003) 6 SCC 123] 2003 Indlaw SC 512, it was held : "A scale of pay is attached to a definite post and in case of a daily-wager, he hold no posts PRE |
The respondent workers cannot be held to hold any posts to claim even comparison with the regular and permanent staff for any or all purposes including a claim for equal pay and allowances PRE |
To claim a relief on the basis of equality, it is for the claimants to substantiate a clear-cut basis of equivalence and a resultant hostile discrimination before becoming eligible to claim rights on a par with the other group vis-'-vis an alleged discrimination PRE |
No material was placed before the High Court as to the nature of the duties of either categories and it is not possible to hold that the principle of "equal pay for equal work" is an abstract one PRE |
The said decision has been noticed in A. Umarani 2004 Indlaw SC 606 (supra Ratio |
CONCLUSION RPC |
For the reasons aforementioned, we do not find any merit in these appeals, which are dismissed accordingly RPC |
There shall, however, be no order as to costs RPC |
Appeals dismissed RPC |
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,aggrieved against the judgment and final order dated 26.03.2004 passed by the High Court Delhi in Criminal Revision Petition No.185 of 2004 by which order the High Court gave the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act,1958 FAC |
herein after referred to as "POB Act") to the second respondent-Gurcharan Singh but maintained the conviction,preferred the above appeal FAC |
The brief facts leading to the filing of the above appeal are as under FAC |
One Mr FAC |
M.K.Verma FAC |
PW-4),Junior Engineer,Civil Line Zone,visited 189 Prem Gali,Punja Sharif,Mori Gate where he found unauthorized construction going at the first floor of the said plot FAC |
F.I.R.was prepared on the report of Mr FAC |
M.K.Verma who forwarded the F.I.R.before Zonal Engineer,who ordered to issue notice under Section 343/344 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act,1957 (for short the "DMC Act").Subsequently,the second respondent along with Kuldeep Singh were prosecuted for commission of offences under Sections 332 and 461 of the DMC Act... |
The trial Court,after the conclusion of the trial,convicted the second respondent under Sections 332 and 461 of the DMC Act and sentenced him to six months simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.5000 (Annexure P-1 RLC |
Aggrieved by that order,the second respondent-accused filed an appeal before the Sessions Court,Delhi FAC |
The said Court by an order and judgment dated 23.3.2004 dismissed the appeal by holding that there was no infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court (Annexure P-2 RLC |
Against the judgment and order dated 23.3.2004,the accused filed Criminal Revision Petition No.185 of 2004 before the High Court Delhi FAC |
At the time of arguments,the advocate for the accused submitted before the High Court that the accused did not wish to challenge the conviction on merits and stated it a fit case of accused to be admitted to the benefit of POB Act on the ground that the accused faced trial for 12 years in the lower courts and remained ... |
The High Court vide its order dated 26.3.2004 held that the accused suffered the agony of trial lasting for 12 years RLC |
Besides that he has already undergone some period in custody RLC |
The High Court also observed that there is no allegation that the petitioner-accused is a previous convict and it further held that the accused deserved the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the POB Act and while maintaining the conviction of the respondent-accused,the sentence of imprisonment and fine as awarded... |
The appellant,aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court,preferred the above appeal by way of special leave petition before this Court FAC |
We have perused the entire pleadings,orders and judgments passed by the lower Courts and also of the High Court,the other annexures,in particular,annexures P-1 and P-2,and records annexed to this appeal and also heard the arguments of Mr Ratio |
Ashwani Kumar,learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant,Mr Ratio |
Vikas Sharma,learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and Mr Ratio |
Jaspal Singh,learned senior counsel,appearing for the second respondent Ratio |
Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the High Court,before extending the benefit of POB Act to the accused did not call for a report from the authorities to check upon the conduct of the accused-respondent as per Section 4(2) of the POB Act and that the appellant-MCD was also not given time... |
He further submitted that the High Court while passing the impugned order and judgment did not take into consideration that the accused-respondent had been convicted in another criminal case No.202 of 1997 by the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate,Patiala House,New Delhi ARG |
In the said case,the accused-respondent was convicted under Section 332/461 of the DMC Act and sentenced to six months simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5000 ARG |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.