Delhi High Court
Food Corporation Of India Mazdoor ... vs Food Corporation Of India & Ors. on 19 March, 2019
$~19 & 20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 19th March, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 3097/2017 & CM APPLN. 13452/2017
19 FOOD CORPORATION
OF INDIA MAZDOOR UNION ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.
versus
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Om Prakash and Mr. Pradeep
Kumar Tripathi, Advocates.
+ W.P.(C) 14007/2018 & CM APPLN. 54764-54766/2018
20 DAMODAR YADAV ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.
versus
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ORS...... Respondents
Through: Mr. Om Prakash and Mr. Pradeep
Kumar Tripathi, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGEMENT (ORAL)
W.P.(C) 3097/2017
1. The petitioner union is espousing the cause of 171 workers working
with Ghevra Depot of respondent No.1. According to the petitioner, 617
workers were working with respondent No.1 on contract basis in 1987. In
April, 1991, contract labour system was abolished. The agreement dated 12 th
April, 1991 was executed by FCI Workers Union and the management of
FCI in pursuance to which only 451 workers were departmentalized.
According to the petitioner, the 451 workers were not departmentalized by
FCI according to the seniority list but arbitrarily on pick and choose basis.
The petitioner received the list of 451 workers through RTI in April, 2015.
The petitioner is seeking regularization of 171 workers w.e.f. 1991 and
payment of wages and other benefits w.e.f. 01 st April, 1991 as well as
compensation for the last 27 years. According to the petitioner, the original
list prepared by the respondents contained the names of 171 workers. The
petitioner is also seeking the direction to the appropriate authority to initiate
civil and criminal proceedings against the respondent for not regularizing
171 workers according to their seniority.
2. This writ petition was taken up for preliminary hearing on admission
on 11th April, 2017 when this Court directed Food Corporation of India to
file a short affidavit which has been filed. The petitioner has filed the
response to the affidavit of FCI.
3. According to the respondents, the writ petition is barred by latches
having been filed after 27 years of the departmentalization of 451 workers in
1991. It is submitted that there was a settlement between FCI Workers
Union and the management of FCI which is recorded in the minutes of
meetings dated 26th/27th February, 1992 in pursuance to which FCI
regularized 451 workers. It is submitted that the remaining 171 workers
were inducted as DPS labour w.e.f. 01st January, 1994 in terms of
memorandum of settlement dated 01st November, 1994. According the
respondents, the aforesaid settlements have binding statutory effect under
Section 18 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Copy of the minutes of
the meeting dated 26th/27th February, 1992 have been placed on record as
Annexure R-3 along with an affidavit of the respondents. It is submitted that
the petitioner union was incorporated in the year 2002 and it has no personal
knowledge of the factual position in the year 1991. Without prejudice, it is
submitted that the petitioner has sought to raise industrial dispute for which
the petitioner had legal remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the petitioner
union was incorporated in the year 2002. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner union is not aware of the settlement between FCI
Workers Union and the management of FCI recorded in the minutes dated
26th/27th February, 1992. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FCI
fabricated the seniority list in the year 1991 and is liable for civil and
criminal action for forging and fabricating the list.
5. This Court is of the prima facie view that this writ petition is barred
by delay and latches having been filed after more than 27 years from the
date of departmentalization of 451 workers by FCI. The remaining 171
workers later on inducted under the DPS system in the year 1994. This writ
petition is also not maintainable on the ground that the aggrieved workers
have equally efficacious remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act which
they have not availed. The writ petition is also not maintainable since
disputed question of facts are involved in this petition which cannot be
decided without recording of the evidence.
6. There is no merit in the petitioner's contention that the petitioner
became aware of the correct facts in 2015 in reply to RTI application. The
petitioner union came into existence in the year 2002 and has no personal
knowledge of the facts in the year 1991. The petitioner is not even aware of
the settlement between FCI Workers Union and the management of FCI
recorded in the minutes dated 26th/27th February, 1992.
7. This writ petition and pending applications are dismissed.
8. W.P.(C) 14007/2018 is also not maintainable and is dismissed.
Pending applications are also dismissed.
J.R. MIDHA, J.
MARCH 19, 2019
ak
