Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1043/2010 1/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1043 of 2010
=========================================================
GUJARAT
FISHERIES CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION LTD - Petitioner
Versus
GENERAL
ENGINEERING MAZDOOR UNION (CITU) - Respondents
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
KM PATEL, SR. ADV. WITH MRS YOGINI V PARIKH
for Petitioner
MR PC
CHAUDHARI for
Respondent
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
Date
: 04/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Learned
advocates for the parties have arrived at a consensus, whereunder
the petition could be disposed of on agreed terms and conditions.
The
Deputy Labour Commissioner, Ahmedabad has issued order dated
17.6.2009 containing following terms of Reference in the schedule
appended to the order :-
(2)
Whether the establishment can terminate, retrench, discontinue or
transfer the services of the workmen, listed in the Annexure B,
in the name of closure or by any other method?
(3)
Whether the 14 workmen, working in Nylon Net Plant at Ahmedabad,
mentioned in the Annexure C should be appointed in the
categories, fixed in the circular from the date of circular and from
the date of their appointment with continuity of service, keeping in
view their seniority, eligibility and behaviour, on the basis of the
circular, issued in the year 2001 by the Gujarat Fisheries Central
Cooperative Association Ltd.?
As
agreed between the counsels for the parties, the Reference Term No.
(2) mentioned in the order dated 17.9.2009, which has been set out
hereinabove, would not now survive on a condition that petitioner
Management shall pay the concerned workmen covered by that Reference
Term No.(2), set out hereinabove, the wages equivalent to the
minimum scale of Class-IV employees of the Corporation and the
admissible allowance thereon. The incremental benefits under scale
would not be available to these workmen but in case the pay scale is
revised, after implementation of the 6th Pay Commission,
then, the minimum scale of revised pay scale after the
implementation of the 6th Pay Commission and the
admissible allowance thereon, would be paid to the workmen concerned
covered under Reference Term No.(2) set out hereinabove. It is
further agreed by the Management that one month wages as per the
aforesaid agreement, calculated and be paid as an advance to the
workmen, which would be adjusted against their wages. The workmen
are accepting the management’s decision to shift their work or
transferring the workmen at anywhere and at any place, wherever
Management has its establishment. This would include the shifting of
workmen to Mangrol or any other places that may be chosen by the
Management. The workmen shall have no grievance with regard to their
transfer anywhere the establishment is functioning. The Management
would as far as possible while effecting such transfer adhere to the
principle of seniority-cum-suitability. The exercise of paying
advance shall be completed within 15 days from the date of receipt
of writ of this order.
The
Reference Term No. (2) set out hereinabove would now not survive and
this would effect to modifying the terms of Reference dated
17.6.2009 to that extent. Now, the Reference would confine to only
Reference Term No. (3) and the Court shall proceed for adjudicating
the same.
It
is also agreed between the parties that the payment of wages
equivalent to Class-IV employees at the minimum scale with allowance
would not cloth the workmen with status of absorption or permanency
as Class-IV in the Corporation. This is without prejudice to the
pending matters in the High Court being Special Civil Application
Nos. Special Civil Application No. 6671 of 2009 and 11884 of 2007.
In
view of the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,
J.)
pallav
Top