Bombay High Court High Court

Khadi And Village Industries … vs Jagdish Balkrishna Patil on 30 September, 2008

Bombay High Court
Khadi And Village Industries … vs Jagdish Balkrishna Patil on 30 September, 2008
Bench: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
                                               1

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                        
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 




                                                                
                         WRIT PETITION NO.5738 OF 2008




                                                               
    Khadi and Village Industries Commission,
    At Sutari Lohari Udyog Workshop, 
    Dahanu Road, Taluka Dahanu, 
    Dist. Thane-401 601.                                   ...Petitioner.




                                                   
                            Vs.
    1. Jagdish Balkrishna Patil,  
    2. Navase Babu Rasale.
        Both residing At & Post Chikhale,
                                 
        Taluka Dahanu, Dist.Thane.                         ...Respondents.  
                                    ....
    Mr. D.A. Athawale for the Petitioner.
    Mr. Y. M. Pendse for the Respondents.
            

                                    .....
                                    CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

September 30, 2008.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Rule, by consent of Counsel returnable forthwith. Counsel

appearing on behalf of the Respondents waives service. By consent

of Counsel and at their request taken up for hearing and final

disposal.

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
2

2. The Petitioner before the Court is a statutory body

constituted under the Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act,

1956. The activities of the Petitioner are subject to the supervision

and control of the Central Government. The expenditure incurred by

the Petitioner, including the salaries of its employees, is provided from

the Consolidated fund. The Central Government appoints the

Chairman and other Directors on the Board of Directors of the

Petitioner.

3. The two Respondents are unskilled workmen, who are

engaged in an establishment conducted by the Petitioner at Dahanu,

known as the Gajanan Naik Multidisciplinary Trading Centre. The

workmen were initially engaged in 1988 as daily wagers. In 1992

their services came to be terminated. The Respondents challenged

the dispensation of their services and succeeded before the Labour

Court at Thane. The workmen were reinstated in service by the

Petitioner as daily wagers and have continued to thereafter remain in

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
3

service.

4. A complaint of unfair labour practices was instituted by the

Respondent-workmen, being Complaint (ULP) 212 of 2006 under

Items 5, 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of

Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.

The relief that was sought against the Petitioner was that the

workmen be made regular employees and be given the status of

permanent employees. Consequential relief of the fixation of pay

scales, increments and allowances was also sought. Evidence was

adduced before the Industrial Court. On behalf of the workmen, the

First Respondent and on behalf of the Petitioner, an officer of the rank

of Assistant Director working in the Workshop at Dahanu, filed

affidavits in lieu of Examination-in-Chief.

5. The defence to the complaint of unfair labour practices was

that the activities of the Petitioner are subject to the administrative

control of the Central Government under the Khadi and Village

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
4

Industries Commission Act, 1956. It has been stated that the Central

Government has laid down the procedure for making appointments to

various categories of posts. Before appointments are made, posts

have to be sanctioned and the procedure for selection, including by

advertising of posts, has to be followed. Reliance was placed on

Standing Order 766 dated 28th April 1969. It has been stated that the

workshop at Dahanu was suffering heavy losses and the consolidated

balance sheet in respect thereof would show an accumulated loss of

Rs. 1.26 crores. According to the Petitioner, sufficient work was not

available even for the regular employees of the Commission and the

salaries of the regular employees have not been paid on time. In the

circumstances, it was stated that the establishment of the Petitioner is

not in a position to absorb an additional burden by way of salary

expenditure and there was no question, therefore, of recruiting

additional man power. It was stated that there was no vacant post of

a helper at Dahanu sanctioned by the Central Government. As a

matter of fact, the officers of the Petitioner have been directed to stop

appointing daily wagers altogether. In any event, it was submitted,

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
5

the Respondents could not be regularized by bypassing the regular

recruitment procedure.

6. Before the Industrial Court one of the defences which was

raised was as regards the jurisdiction of the Court under the

Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair

Labour Practices Act, 1971. This challenge is founded on the

argument that the appropriate Government in respect of the Petitioner

is the Central Government and not the State Government under

Section 2(a)(i) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In so far as this

aspect is concerned, the issue is no longer res integra and is covered

by the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 5th May 2005

in Khadi and Village Industries Commission vs. Jagdish B.Patil

(LPA 55 of 2004 in Writ Petition 5312 of 2001). In fact, the judgment

was in a case involving the Respondents to these proceedings. The

Division Bench held that the appropriate Government in relation to

industrial disputes concerning the Khadi and Village Industries

Commission is the State Government. In the circumstances, the first

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
6

issue would stand concluded by the judgment of the Division Bench.

7. The Industrial Court by its order dated 21st April 2008 held

that the workmen had been continued as daily wagers ever since

1988 and that it was necessary that the posts on which they were

working should be got sanctioned. The operative direction which was

issued by the Industrial Court was to the following effect :

“The respondents are hereby directed to consider the claim
of the complainants on priority and if at any time in near

future the posts on which they are working are sanctioned
and if not it is further directed that the Respondents should
take necessary positive steps to submit proposal to the
appropriate authority of the concerned for getting

sanctioned posts on which the complainants are working,
so that the same needs to be get sanctioned within the

stipulated period of three months from the date of this order
and thereafter the workers concerned be awarded all the
monetary and consequential benefits arising out of the
same.”

8. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted

that the Industrial Court has transgressed its jurisdiction in issuing a

direction that the Petitioner should submit a proposal for getting the

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
7

posts on which the Respondents are working sanctioned from the

Competent Authority and that the posts should be got sanctioned

within a period of three months upon which the workmen concerned

should be awarded all monetary and consequential benefits arising

therefrom. It was submitted that such a direction for getting the posts

sanctioned by the Central Government could not have been issued

and having regard to the precarious financial position of the Petitioner,

it was impossible to contemplate any further recruitment at this stage.

On the other hand, Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent-

workmen supported the order of the Industrial Court.

9. The Petitioner is a statutory body constituted under the

Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act, 1956. The Commission

is established and constituted under Section 4(1) and the members

of the Commission are appointed by the Central Government. The

functions of the Commission under Section 15(1) are to plan,

promote, organize and assist in the establishment and development

of khadi and village industries in rural areas. Section 16 provides that

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
8

the Commission would be bound in the discharge of its functions by

such directions as the Central Government may give to it. Under

Section 17, the Central Government, after due appropriation made by

Parliament by law, pays to the Commission in each financial year

such sums as may be considered necessary for the performance of

the functions of the Commission under the Act. Under Section 20(1)

the Commission is required to prepare and submit its budgets to the

Central Government. Sub-section (2) of Section 20 provides that no

sum shall be expended by or on behalf of the Commission unless the

expenditure is covered by a specific provision in the budget approved

by the Central Government. The Central Government is

empowered to frame rules under Section 26 to give effect to the

provisions of the Act. The Commission is subject to the

administrative control of the Central Government. The Respondents

are daily wagers whose services were dispensed with in 1992.

Following an order of reinstatement passed by the Labour Court, they

have been continued as daily wagers. On behalf of the Petitioner,

evidence was adduced before the Industrial Court. The Assistant

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
9

Director, who deposed, stated that no post of helper had been

sanctioned by the Central Government and even against sanctioned

posts, there was a regular procedure for filling up vacancies. In so far

as the workshop at Dahanu is concerned, it has sustained

accumulated losses of Rs. 1.26 crores and sufficient work was not

available even for regular employees. The Respondents were being

paid minimum wages at the rate of Rs.110/- per day.

10. The Central Government which has the power and

jurisdiction to sanction posts in the establishment of the Commission

was not a party to the complaint. There is merit in the submission

which was urged on behalf of the Petitioner that the Industrial Court

has acted in excess of its jurisdiction in directing that the posts should

be got sanctioned within three months by the Central Government.

The jurisdiction to sanction posts does not vest with the Petitioner,

but with the Central Government. The Central Government was not

before the Industrial Court. A direction that the posts should be got

sanctioned within a period of three months could not have been

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
10

passed in proceedings to which the sanctioning authority was not a

party. That apart, the fundamental point is that the question as to

whether a particular post should be sanctioned or otherwise is entirely

a matter which has to be determined by the Central Government in

its discretion, having regard to the financial and administrative

implications of creating additional posts. It is no part of the

jurisdiction of the Court to intercede in this area. Recruiting additional

manpower impinges on budgetary provisions. Granting permanency

similar affects the financial position of the organization which

government funds. Judicial orders of the nature which the Industrial

Court has passed will only hasten the process of rendering a

disfunctional organization defunct. Courts, including Industrial Courts,

wide as their jurisdiction may be, must be conscious of the clear line

which demarcates judicial review from matters which lie within the

province of government. Sanctioning posts is an instance of a power

which is the realm of the executive. There is merit in the submission

which has been urged on behalf of the Petitioner that having regard to

the precarious financial position, particularly of the workshop at

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::
11

Dahanu, there is no need for additional man power, particularly in the

context of a situation where even the regular employees do not have

adequate work. The Petitioner has continued the Respondents in

service in pursuance of the order passed by the Labour Court

following the earlier termination in the year 1992, which was

challenged. That however, cannot confer upon the Respondents a

right to regularization. The direction which was issued by the

Industrial Court to the Petitioner to move the Central Government for

sanction and to get the posts sanctioned within a period of three

months is, in the circumstances, unsustainable and will have to be

quashed and set aside. The Petition has to be allowed and is

accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause

(a). In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to

costs.

…..

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:55:16 :::