AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon''ble Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari
Heard learned counsels for the parties.
By this writ petition, the petitioner- Union has claimed that its members, named in Schedule-A annexed with the writ petition, the workmen-petitioners, who were originally appointed as "Beldar", were up-graded as "Helper" vide order Annex-5 dated 04.07.1996 even though they were originally, at the time of appointment as "Beldar" in the year 1989-90, were holding the qualification of 8th pass and, therefore, after two years, as per Standing Orders, they should be given the status of ''semi-permanent'' as ''Helpers'' and not as "Beldar". Upon this relief being not given, they approached the Industrial Tribunal by way of reference u/s 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the learned Industrial Tribunal vide the award Annex-7 dated 25.09.2001 granted them the relief of being given ''semi-permanent status'' upon completion of two years from the date of their initial appointment as "Beldar".
Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjeet Purohit, urged that this writ petition has been filed seeking relief that they should have been given ''semi-permanent'' status after completion of two years as "Helpers" with the higher pay scale because they were already possessing the qualification of 8th pass and, therefore, to that extent the award of the learned Industrial Tribunal Annex-7 dated 25.09.2001 deserves to be modified.
On the other hand, Mr. Vimal Mathur, learned counsel for the respondent-PHED urged that the petitioners-workmen could be given the ''semi-permanent'' status only as "Beldar", the position on which they were initially appointed, after completion of two years of service as such. He further submitted that since they were up-graded to the position of Helper on being found qualified vide order Annex-5 dated 04.07.1996, the relief claimed by the workmen through their Union in the present writ petition, cannot be granted to them. He further submitted that Annex-4 order dated 24.05.1996 makes this position very clear that upon up-gradation to the post of Helper, such workmen would not be entitled to any retrospective benefit.
Having heard learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that there is no force in the present writ petition of the workmen and up-gradation to the post of Helper from the position of "Beldar" cannot be given retrospective effect even though they were originally qualified to be appointed as Helpers. However, the fact remains that the workmen were appointed as "Beldar" and their entitlement of being granted the ''semi-permanent'' status after two years of their service as such has already granted to them by the impugned award.
Consequently, the present writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and same is hereby dismissed. No costs.