B.Srinu, Bhadrachalam Town, Khammam ... vs The Apnpdcl., Warangal And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 2276 Tel

Telangana High Court

B.Srinu, Bhadrachalam Town, Khammam ... vs The Apnpdcl., Warangal And 2 Others on 18 June, 2024

Author: Nagesh Bheemapaka

Bench: Nagesh Bheemapaka

       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

               WRIT PETITION No.28892 of 2008
ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

"....to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispense with the services of the petitioners as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the judgments of this Hon'ble court as well as Apex Court and consequently direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioners on contract basis in the respondents organization even though the contractor changes."

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration,

Sri N.M.Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that in similar circumstances the Hon'ble Division Bench of this

Court has disposed of Writ Petition Nos.20840 of 2017 and

batch, by order dated 03.10.2018. The said submission is not

disputed by Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned Standing Counsel for

the respondents-TSNPDCL.

3. In view of the submission made by the both counsel,

without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is

disposed of in terms of the order dated 03.10.2018 passed by

the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition

Nos.20840 of 2017 and batch, as follows;

"i) persons who claim that they fulfill the criteria laid down in the guide-lines/orders

issued by the Corporation/Companies, may approach the Committee and satisfy the Committee that they are covered by the Scheme and that they fulfill the eligibility criteria. The Committee may look into the same and take a decision within 12 weeks;

ii) persons who were not in employment on the cut-off date viz., 04.12.2016 cannot either seek the benefit of the scheme or challenge the scheme. The scheme prescribing a cut-off date is a product of a settlement reached under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The settlement was under Section 12 (3) of the Act. Therefore, one of the conditions prescribed in the scheme viz., the cut-off date, cannot be challenged.

Hence, the challenge to the prescription of a cut- off date contained in the scheme is rejected. However, these persons are given liberty to go before the Labour Court or any other appropriate Forum prescribed by any Special Enactments, if they have a right of absorption or regularisation conferred by such Special Enactments;

(iii) persons who are out of the scheme on account of non-payment of contribution to the Employees Provident Fund, cannot also seek the benefit of the Scheme solely on the ground that

the fault lay with the Distribution Companies. If these persons have any right conferred by any special enactment for regularization and/or absorption, they are given liberty to move the Fora prescribed under those enactments;

(iv) the claims of those engaged by the Civil Contractors for construction purposes are rejected."

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ

petition shall stand closed. No costs.

_____________________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J

Date:18.06.2024 Smk