Daily Wage Workmen Entitled To Permanency On Completing Specific Tenure, Then Entitled To Additional Benefits Available To Regular Workmen: Gujarat HC
The Gujarat High Court has held that as per Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, daily-wage workmen who have completed a specific tenure are entitled to permanency. It was further held that once permanency is granted, these workmen are also entitled to additional benefits such as pensions and higher pay scales, which are available for regularly appointed workmen.
In that context, the Bench of Justice Nikhil S Kariel observed that, "an employee, who had originally been appointed on daily-wages, completing a specific number of years, more particularly the same being in consonance with Section 25B of Industrial Disputes Act, then the employee is entitled to be granted benefits of permanency... upon attaining the status of permanency the employee, who was born in the department as daily-wager is entitled to be treated at part with employees, who have been appointed on regular/permanent basis by way of direct selection."
Counsel Dhruv Thakkar and Counsel Nirav V Parghi appeared for the petitioners, and AGP Nidhi Vyas appeared for the respondent.
The Workmen, who were employed by the Forest Department ("Management"), had raised several concerns, including the denial of benefits outlined in the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. Despite their prolonged tenure as daily wage workers, the Management had failed to accord them the entitlements stipulated in the resolution. Feeling aggrieved, the Workmen had approached the Gujarat High Court ("High Court") for relief.
The Workmen had argued that they were currently being remunerated at a rate significantly lower than what they rightfully deserved, had the Management implemented the benefits of Government Resolutions dated 17.10.1988, 15.09.2014, and 06.04.2016. They had emphasized that many of them had completed the requisite duration of service for potential regularization and the ensuing benefits.
The Court referred to a catena of decisions including Executive Engineer Panchayat (MAA & M) Department and Another Vs. Samudabhai Jyotibhai Bhedi & Ors., wherein it had been held that, "upon completion of a certain number of years, while the employees concerned would be entitled to claim permanency and whereas the period of service put in by the employees concerned on the date when they were treated as permanent employees was to be treated as continuous service for deciding pension as available to the petitioners."
Subsequently, the Court directed the petitioners to prefer individual representations before the concerned respondents, which would be decided within 8 weeks, and any consequential benefits would be paid to the petitioners within 4 weeks.
Cause Title: Manilal Manglaji Zariya & Ors. vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Click here to read/download the Judgment
