Holding

The Court held that ONGC cannot appoint compassionate category candidates before the identified workmen are regularised, but may offer a compensation package to those workmen, and acceptance of such package is not fettered by the earlier order.

Summary

The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) regularly hires seasonal casual workers for its field surveys. A tribunal ordered that 153 identified workmen who met educational qualifications and 240 days of service be regularised before any new recruitment. The Supreme Court, in its 20 November 2006 order, enjoined ONGC from recruiting from outside until those workmen were absorbed and directed that seasonal hires also be considered first. ONGC later sought permission to appoint candidates from the compassionate appointment category and to offer a compensation package to the remaining workmen instead of regularisation. The Court rejected the request to appoint compassionate candidates before the identified workmen were absorbed, holding that it would modify the earlier order, but allowed ONGC to offer the compensation package, which, if accepted, would not be constrained by the prior directions. The interlocutory applications were therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether ONGC may recruit from the compassionate appointment category before regularising the workmen identified by the Tribunal and the Supreme Court order of 20 November 2006.
Whether ONGC may offer a compensation package to the remaining workmen in lieu of regularisation without violating the earlier injunction.

Subjects

regularisationcasual workersseasonal employmentindustrial tribunalcompassionate appointmentcompensation packageinjunctionrecruitment ban

Judgment

[2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 645

O.N.G.C. LTD. A
v.
ENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH
I.A. NOS. 11 AND 12 OF 2009
IN
(Civil Appeal No. 6607 of 2005) 8
SEPTEMBER 17,. 2009
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.]

c
Labour Law:

Regularisation of casual/contingent/temporary workmen
- ONGC engaging casual workers every year in a particular
season for a specified period - Claim by such workers for o
regularization- Industrial Tribunal directing ONGC to consider
those workmen for regularization whose names were
mentioned in the Schedule to the affidavit and who fulfilled
the educational qualification and had put in 240 days of work
in a year - When matter reached Supreme Court, it by order E
dated 20. 11.2006 injuncted ONGC from making· any
recruitment from outside till such time the specified workmen
were absorbed against regular vacancies - IA by candidates
seeking appointment on compassionate ground as also by
remaining workmen seeking absorption on completion of two F
If years, for modification of order dated 20.11.2006 - Held:
From the order dated 20. 11.2006 it was clear that intention of
the Court was that till such time as the specified workmen wem
not absorbed against regular vacancies in the category G
concerned, nn recruitment could be made by ONGC - Similar
provision was also made with regard to the workmen who were
employed on seasonal basis - The prayer made by O.N. G. C.
for leave to appoint candidates from the compassionate
645 H
646 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A category group before all the workmen who were identified
after the Award of the Tribunal to be eligible for appointment, -.\
are absorbed, cannot be granted, as that would not only go
against the order passed by the Court on 20. 11.2006, but
would also amount to modifying the same - However, it is
B made clear that such rejection would not prevent ONGC from
offering compensation package to persons belonging to the
categories mentioned in the order - If such package is
accepted by any of those candidates, both the ONGC as well
as such candidate will be at liberty to act on the basis of such ).
c acceptance and shall not be fettered in any way by the
directions given either by Tribunal or the Court on 20. 11. 2006.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: I.A. Nos. 11and12'
D of 2009.
..,
IN
'l

Civil Appeal No. 6607 of 2005.
E
Raju Ramaohandran, Ranjit Kumar, Aruna Mathur, Rakesh
Sawhney, Vimal Dubey (for Arputham, Aruna & Co.) Abilash
K. Clerk, P.K. Manohar, Sanjay Ghose, Anita Shenoy for the
~
Respondent.
F ,..,
The following Order of the Court was delivered by

ORDER
G
ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. The Oil and Natural Gas A
J:
Corporation Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'the O.N.G.C.') is
a public sector undertaking which carries out geological and
geophysical surveys for the exploration of petroleum. Such work
H
O.N.GC. LTD. v. ENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH 647
[ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]

is seasonal and is confined to the period between November A
>- each year and the months of April or May of the following year.
Every year, at the commencement of the new season, the
O.N.G.C. starts recruiting casual/contingent/temporary workmen
for specified periods and their services are terminated at the
end of the field season. Having regard to the nature of the work B
involved, such practice is said to have been in existence from
1956 when the O.N.G.C. was incorporated.

~.

2. With the increase in the workforce over the years, the
aforesaid practice came to be questioned by the Engineering
c
Mazdoor Sangh, the respondent herein, on behalf of its
members who had been employed as such casual/contingent
or temporary workmen and an industrial dispute was raised in
the form of a demarid for regularization of such workmen. The D
~ dispute was ultimately referred by the Government of India to
the Industrial Tribunal (Central) at Vadodara by way of Reference
(ITC) No.6 of 1991 to decide whether the demand of the
Respondent-Sangh for regularisation of such employees and
for other consequential benefits, was justified and if the answer E
to the said question was yes, to what relief would the workmen

.. be entitled .

... 3. The aforesaid Reference was answered in favour of the
workmen though the Tribunal made it clear that the Reference F·
was to be restricted to those workmen whose names appeared
in the Schedule to the affidavit filed by the O.N.G.C. The Tribunal
directed the O.N.G.C. to consider the names of those workmen
in the same descending order in which they were mentioned
G
in the Schedule as and when vacancies occurred and to
,..
.l regularize them provided they satisfied the prescribed
educational qualifications and had also put in 240 days of work
in a year. The O.N.G.C. was also directed to give such
H
648 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A workmen who \Nere eligible, age relaxation of one year for every ....
completed 240 days of work in a year.

4. The aforesaid order of the Tribunal was challenged by
the Respondent-Sangh before the Gujarat High Court in Special
B Civil Application No.12850of1994. The learned Single Judge
hearing the matter observed that though regularization could not
be effected in the absence of permanent posts, the availability
of permanent posts is a fortuitous circumstance and .~

consequential confirmation is, therefore, uncertain, but that there
c was no bar against treating a person to be regular even if a
permanent post was not available. The learned Single Judge
accordingly modified the order of the Tribunal and directed the
respondents to treat the employees who were covered by
D Standing Order 2(ii) as regular employees.
-f.

5. The matter was taken by the O.N.G.C. to the Division
Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 729 of 1999. During the
pendency of the Appeal, the Respondent-Sangh gave-up its
E claim with regard to the first direction given by the learned
Single Judge and only pressed for implementation of-the
seeond direction. Similarly, the O.N.G.C. gave up its challenge ...
in respect of the third direction. Accordingly, the controversy in
the appeal was restricted to the challenge in respect of the ""
F second direction only. While granting such relief to the parties
to the· appeal, the Division Bench also directed that the
workmen concerned should be notionally treated as regularized
with effect from 1.5.1999. It was clarified that the directions given
would apply to the surviving employees within the 189
G
employees who had been accepted as having acquired
temporary status and whose employment had been saved by ....&:··"'
the order dated 30.5. t999 in Complaint (ITC) No.5 of 1993.

H
O.N.GC. LTD. v. ENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH 649
[ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]

6. When the matter was brought to this Court by the A
... O.N.G.C., this Court restored the order of the Tribunal whereby
the 153 workmen identified to be eligible for regularization were
to be treated at par with the regular employees and their
services were to be treated as having been notionally
regularized from 1.5.1999. While disposing of the appeal on B
20.11.2006, this Court injuncted the respondents from making
any recruitment from outside till such time as the 153 workmen
were absorbed against regular vacancies in the concerned
category. A further direction was given that even in matters of
seasonal employment, the said 153 workmen or those who
c
. remained after regularization from time to time, were to be
considered first for employment before any other workmen were
engaged for the same type of work in the field. This Court also
directed the O.N.G.C. to make a serious attempt to regularize D
~· the services of the workmen concerned in terms of the order
passed by the Tribunal as quickly as possible, but preferably
within a period of two years from the date of the order.
-I-

7. While the aforesaid judgment was delivered on E
20.11.2006, it was only on 23.2.2009 that I.A. No.11 of 2009
was filed and I.A. No.12 of 2009 was, thereafter, filed on
9.4.2009 in Civil Appeal No.6607 of 2005. While I.A. No.11 of
~
2009 has been filed for a modification of the order passed by
this Court on 20.11.2006 in Civil Appeal No.6607 of 2005, I.A. F
No.12 of 2009 has been filed by the Respondent-Sangh, inter
alia, for suitable directions to be issued to the O.N.G.C. to
absorb all the remaining workmen on the completion of two
years, as directed by this Court in its judgment dated
20.11.2006. G
A
~

8. When the applications were taken up for consideration,
Mr. Raju Ramachandran, learned Senior Advocate, who
H
650 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A appeared for the O.N.G.C., submitted that while implementing
the aforesaid directions given by this Court, the O.N.G.C. was
faced with an industrial dispute from candidates who were also
" ,;..

waiting for appointment from the compassionate appointment
category. Mr. Ramachandran submitted that no person from the
B said category could be appointed over the last 9 years having
regard to the pendency of the proceedings before the Court and
that apart from the 153 workmen, who were before the Court,
the Court should also allow O.N.G.C. to make appointments -)..

from the compassionate appointment category.
c
9. Mr. Ramachandran also urged that, in fact, 138
workmen were admittedly covered by the Award of the Industrial
Tribunal. In order to implement the Award, as also the judgment
D of this Court, the said 138 workmen were invited by the
O.N.G.C. to attend the selection process strictly in accordance -+-
with the directions issued by this Court. Mr. Ramachandran
submitted that 137 workmen attended the selection process
and only 77 of the said workmen were found qualified and
E eligible for being empanelled for jobs in different categories.
Learned counsel urged that 60 workmen were found to be unfit
for regular employment. He also submitted that out of the 77 ,.
workmen found to be eligible, 58 workmen had been given
)<
appointment while 19 workmen were kept on a panel and were
F still left to be absorbed against regular vacancies. He urged
that having regard to the complexity of the matter, serious ._
.

thought had been given as to how the controversy could be >--

resolved. Mr. Ramachandran submitted that one of the
proposed methods to resolve the issue was to offer a
G settlement package to the 19 workmen, who were yet to be
A
absorbed against regular vacancies, in lieu of absorption, and x
to permit appointment of dependents of deceased employees
on compassionate grounds. The compensation package is as ,
,I.-

H
O.N.G.C. LTD. v. ENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH 651
[ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]

follows:- A
•. .• "COMPENSATION PACKAGE

1. Amount equivalent to two month's wages for each
completed year of service in ONGC or amount B
equivalent to wages of left over period upto 60
years of age, whichever is less.

2. Provident Fund.

3. Amount of wages for balance period of leave at
c
credit."

10. Mr. Ramchandran submitted that on account of the ban
imposed by this Court on recruitment before the 153 0
employees could be absorbed, no fresh appointments could be
~
given in the category of compassionate appointment, which has
created growing resentment among other categories of
workmen who were waiting for appointment in similar posts.
E
11. The relief prayed for by .the O.N.G.C. for leave to offer
the compensation package in lieu of appointment was
, ..... opposed on behalf of the said workmen, as also the prayer
..i made for leave to appoint persons from the compassionate
appointment category without absorbing all the workmen, who F
were yet to be absorbed.

12. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior Advocate, appearing
for the Sangh, submitted that the order passed by this Court G
on 20.11.2006, and subsequently clarified on 8.2.2008 was
.. f very clear and unambiguous. Learned. counsel submitted that
the rights of the 153 workmen identified before the Tribunal had
crystallized in the order of the Tribunal, which was subsequently
upheld by this Court and till such time as they were absorbed, H
652 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (AOOL.) S.C.R.

A no fresh appointments could be.given from any other category,
notwithstanding the fact that there were other candidates
. waiting to be appointed on compassionate grounds. Mr. Ranjit .'
Kumar also submitted that as far as Mr. Ramchandran's
contention that 60 workmen were found to ·be ineligible for
B . appointment, the same could not be accepted having regard
· to the fact that the Award of the Tribunal and the order passed
by this Court clearly indicated that the Reference was to be
restricted to the workmen, whose names appeared in the
schedule to the affidavit, which was ultimately identified as far
C as 153 workmen are concerned. Mr. Ranjit Kumar pointed out
that ONGC was directed that as and when vacancies to the
regular· posts arose, they would be required to consider the
names of those workmen in the same descending order in ,....
,
0 .which they were mentioned in the schedule and that they would ~' .,
be regularized provided they satisfied the specific prescribed
educational qualifications. It was also indicated that for each 1'·
240 days work in a year put in by each workmen, ONGC would
give such workmen, age relaxation of one year. Mr. Ranjit T
j
E Kumar submitted that on account of the ban imposed by,this
Court on recruitment before the 153 employees were absorbed;
no fresh appointments could be given in the categorycof
compassionate appointment, which has created growing
resentment amongst other categories of workmen, who were
... /
i..
F also waiting for appointment for similar posts. sd
le
13. Mr. Ranjit Kumar urged that the submission now being·
made on behalf of the ONGC runs counter to the directions
contained in the Award of the Tribunal, as upheld by this Court
G and also contrary to the directions given by this Court in support-
thereof. ·srl

14. From the order dated 20th November, 2006, it is quiet
H obvious that the intention of this Court was that till such time
..:.
O.N.G.C. LTD. v. ENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH 653
[ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]

as the 153 workmen, who were identified after the Award of A
the Tribunal were not absorbed against regular vacancies in the
concerned category, no recruitment from outside could be
made by the applicant ONGC in the same or similar posts.
Similar provision was also made with regard to the workmen,
who were to be employed on a seasonal basis. However, we 8
must also record Mr. Ramachandran's submissions at this
stage that out of the 153 persons whose names were available,
15 persons were found to be not eligible for consideration,
leaving 138 persons who were eligible for consideration in C
terms of the Award of the learned Tribunal and the judgment of
this Court.

15. Accordingly, at least the case of the 138 workmen, who
had, in fact, been found to be eligible for appointment had to o
be considered.

16. However, the picture, as portrayed by Mr.
Ramchandran, is not as grave as has been made out by him
since all the persons concerned, namely, the candidates, who E
are yet to be absorbed in regular vacancies in terms of the
Tribunal's order, as upheld by this Court on 20th November,
....
2006, and those waiting for compassionate appointment, have
been provided with employment, as contingent staff. There
should not have been any difficulty for the ONGC to implement F
the Tribunal's Award in respect of the 137 workmen, who were
found eligible by ONGC within t.he period of two years after the
passing of the Award. Apart from the orders passed by the
Tribunal and this Court, equity demands that the wonsmen who G
have been in continuous employment as contingent workmen
from 1992, should be considered first for regularisation before
those, who come in at a later stage.

17. At this juncture, we may also refer to the submission H
654 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A which had been made on behalf of one of the intervenors from
the compassionate appointment category that there were large ~
~
number of vacancies available in which all could be
accommodated. Mr. Ramachandran has denied such
submission and in the affidavit filed with regard to the copy of
B the Minutes of the 71 st meeting of the Joint Committee, it has
been pointed out that the number of i"'acancies indicated
represented vacancies in various departments and particularly "
of a te9hnical nature and did not necessarily include the
c vacancies against which appointments were to be made as far
as the concerned workmen and the compassionate appointees·
were concerned. r

18. From the order dated 20.11.2006 it was clearly the
D intention of this Court that till such time as the 153 workmen
were not absorbed against regula'r vacancies in the concerned
category, no recruitment could be made by 'the applicant. +
Similar provision was _also m·ade with. regard to the workmen
who were employed on seasonal basis.
E
19. Having considered the submissions_ made. on behalf
of the O.N.G.C; and the Mazdoor Sangh, we are not inclined
to grant the prayer made on behalf of the O.N.G:C. for leave to .,..
appoint candidates from the .compassionate category group
·~ . >-
F before all the workmen who were identified aft~r the Award of
'•
the Tribunal to be eligible for appointment, are absorbed, as
that would not only go against the order passed by us on 20th
November, 2006, but would also amount to modifying the same.'
G
20'. While rejecting the prayer ma~e on behalf of the ONGC,
we, however, make it clear that such rejection would not prevent ~ ....
the ONGC from offering the compensation package either to
those workmen from amongst the 137 workmen, who are yet
H to be absorbed or those waiting for appointment from the
O.N.G.C. LTD. v. ENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH 655
[ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]

compassionate appointment category. If such package is A
accepted by any of those candidates, both the ONGC as well
as such candidate will be at liberty to act on the basis of such
acceptance and shall not be fettered in any way by the
directions given either by the Tribunal or this Court on 29th
November, 2006. B

21. This order shall dispose of I.A. Nos.11 and 12 of 2009,
+ but we also make it clear that we are not passing any orders
in terms of prayer (b) of I.A. No.12 of 2009.

R.P. Interlocutory Applications disposed of.