W.P. Nos. 17129 to 17139 of 2012. Case: K. Pushparaj and Ors. Vs Chennai Port Trust, Rep.by its Chairman, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001. High Court of Madras (India)
| Case Number | W.P. Nos. 17129 to 17139 of 2012 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mr. P.K. Rajagopal, Adv. and For Respondents: M/s. S. Haja Mohideen Gisthi, Adv. |
| Judges | Mr. K. Chandru, J. |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | November 20, 2012 |
| Court | High Court of Madras (India) |
Order:
Mr. K. Chandru, J.
1. This is a second round of litigation by the petitioners. The petitioners
earlier filed W.P. Nos. 36273 to 36284 of 203 claiming absorption as permanent
employees in the Clearing and Forwarding Department (for short 'C & amp; F
Department') or in any other department in the Chennai Port Trust with effect
from the date of which proportionate vacancies were filled up by the Madras
Dock Labour Board in any one of its schemes as agreed before this Court in W.A.
No. 62 of 1992. On notice from this Court, the Port Trust filed the Counter
affidavit resisting the claim of the petitioners.
2. In the identical counter affidavit filed by them during December 2005 it
was contended that a compromise was reached during the year 1992 between the Union and the Madras Dock Labour Board and based on that
direction was issued in W.A. No. 62 of 1992. Hence, the question of filling up
of vacancies and following the priority could arise only if vacancies were to
be filled up under Clearing and Forwarding Scheme framed in 1988. As per the
compromise memo, the Madras Dock Labour Board was bound to fill up vacancies
(the Madras Dock Labour Board has now been merged with Chennai Port Trust with
effect from 28.5.2001) if the strength of Clearing and Forwarding Scheme falls
below 320 only as per para (4) of compromise Memo. There was no obligation on
the part of Madras Dock Labour Board to fill up the vacancies that arose in the
Registered Scheme with the erstwhile 67 Casuals (now 65 casuals) of Clearing
and Forwarding Labour of the private Scheme, but only to provide one vacancy
notionally in the ratio of 4:1, to fill up on priority in the Clearing and
Forwarding Scheme for every 4 vacancies in the Clearing and Forwarding Scheme
in the ratio of 4:1 between the dependent of Dock Labour Board who are in the
waiting list and Clearing and Forwarding Casuals. Even after introduction of
Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme during the year 1992, the strength of 500
has been reduced to 336 as on 24.3.1997 as against the required optimum
strength of 320.
3. It was also stated in that counter affidavit that to ensure peace and
industrial amenity, 15 persons within the list of 65 persons were given
appointment in the Registered Scheme though these 15 persons do not have any
right to stake claim for appointment in the said Scheme. Further, in order to
secure continuous employment opportunities, a Memorandum of Understanding was
reached on 22.8.1992 between the Madras Dock Labour Board and recognised
Unions, viz., Madras Port & Dock Workers Congress and Madras Harbour
Workers Union for deployment of workmen from one scheme to another scheme.
There will be no occasion to give appointment to any of these 65 persons, whose
names are in the list under the compromise Memo in the C & amp; F Scheme.
Since there was no vacancy available in the Clearing and Forwarding Scheme,
instead of keeping them notionally on record, the management of Madras Dock
Labour Board had offered appointment to 15 retrenched casuals of...
To continue reading
Request your trial