AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of the management. He submits, there have been orders made by coordinate Benches, requiring affidavits being filed. His client has also filed affidavit. The requirement was because though there was direction for regularization of 43 workmen, no particulars could be provided by the union, at whose instance the reference was caused.
Mr. Satapathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of the union and submits, his client is opposing the petition, on behalf of the 43 workmen who are entitled to regularization under the award. His client has filed successive affidavits giving the particulars. The workmen are still working but without wages. Mr. Mishra disputes submission of any workman working for his client.
We find, impugned is award dated 30th March, 2010. We have perused order of reference being whether 80 causal workers are entitled for regularization along with payment for equal pay on equal work. The tribunal found on facts, inter alia, 43 persons out of 80 workmen were seeking regularization. Particulars of the persons have been given in page-11 of the award. It goes on to record a further finding of fact that the management had regularized good number of Nominal Muster Roll (NMR) employees with approval of the Board of Directors. Those regularized stood in same footing as the 43. Hence, opinion of the tribunal that claim for regularization made by them merits consideration owing to them having rendered unblemished service under the corporation for more than 18 years. This too is a finding of fact.
The management will be heard on adjourned date regarding perversity on any one or more of above recorded findings of fact.
List on 24th November, 2022.
……………………………