STATE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR. ETC.versusVIJA Y KUMAR UPADHYA Y AND ANR. ETC.
- Citation
- 1997 INSC 36
- Decided
- 17 January 1997
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The Supreme Court’s earlier order confirming regularisation is final, obligating the corporation to regularise the respondents’ services, subject to a tripartite meeting if difficulties arise.
Summary
The respondents, who had been appointed on an ad‑hoc basis, filed writ petitions challenging their retrenchment. The Allahabad High Court set aside the retrenchment orders and directed regularisation of their services, a decision later confirmed by the Supreme Court on May 10, 1991. The corporation appealed, arguing that subsequent developments—handing over establishments to the private sector and winding up some units—made regularisation unduly burdensome. The Court held that the Supreme Court’s earlier orders were final and the respondents were therefore entitled to regularisation, and that the corporation could not be exempted on the basis of later changes. However, the Court suggested that if practical difficulties arise, the corporation may convene a tripartite meeting of the workers’ union, a labour department officer, and a corporation officer to reach an amicable settlement. The appeals were dismissed, the corporation was ordered to regularise the services subject to the suggested procedure, and the contempt direction from the High Court was not enforced.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondents are entitled to regularisation of service after the Supreme Court’s earlier confirmation of the High Court’s order.
- Whether the corporation can be exempted from regularising services due to subsequent privatization or winding up of establishments.
- Whether a tripartite meeting is an appropriate mechanism to resolve any difficulties in implementing regularisation.
Subjects
Judgment
U.P. STATE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT A
CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR. ETC.
v.
VIJAY KUMAR UPADHYAY AND ANR. ETC.
JANUARY 17, 1997
B
[K. RAMASWAMY AND S. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ.]
Service Law :
Regularisation of Service-Employees getting benefit of the order of C
High Court as confirmed by the Supreme Cowt-Some employees senior to
those who got the benefit-High Court giving the benefit to them also-Held,
valid-In case of any difficulty to convene tripartite meeting consisting of
workers' Union, one of the officers of Labour Department and an Officer of
the appellant-Corporation to thrash out problems and anive at an amicable
settlement. D
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 450 of
1997 Etc.
;
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.3.92 of the Allahabad High
Court in C.M.W.P. No. 428 of 1991. E
Vijay Hansaria and R.B. Misra for the Appellants.
Raju Ramachandran, Sunil Gupta, H.K. Puri, Joseph Pookatt, Ms. S.
Ramachandran and R.S. Jena for the Respondents.
F
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
.Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Admittedly, the respondents came to be appointed on ad hoc basis G
pursuant to writ petition filed earlier by many others. The High Court by
its judgment dated 4.2.1991 in Writ Petition No. 29537/90 had allowed the
writ petition and set aside the order of the retrenchment and directed
regularisation of their services. Some of the respondents, admittedly, are
senior to those who had the benefit of the order of regularisation as H
369
370 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) 1 S.C.R.
A confirmed by this Court as on May 10, 1991. Consequently, following the
earlier judgment, the High Court in the impugned order allowed the writ
petitions with similar directions .. Thus, these appeals by special leave have
been filed.
In view of the fact that the earlier orders of this Court have become
B final, the respondent are entitled to regularisation of their services. The
learned counsel for the appellants has brought to our notice that since ~ ~
subsequently there was a development after the orders passed by th.is
Court, namely, some of the establishments have been handed to the private
sector and some of them are in the process of being wound up, the orders
C passed earlier by the· High Court as confirmed by this Comt and the
present order would cause hardship to the appellant- Corporation. We do
not think that we can go into that aspect of the matter particularly, when
the order in favour of some of the employees has attained finality. Similarly
the respondents are entitled to the same benefit.
D However, if there is any difficulty in working out, it will be open to
the Corporation to convene a tri partite meeting consisting of workers'
Union, one of the officers of Labour Department and an officer of the
appellant-Corporation to thrash out the problems and arrive at an amicable
.settlement to diffuse and sort out the above difficulty.
·.
E The appeals are accordingly dismissed. In view of the above direc-
tions,. the direction for contempt issued by the High Court may not be
enforced. However, the appellant-Corporation shall regularise their service
and it will be subject to the suggestions made hereinbefore. No costs.
G.N. Appeals are dismissed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.