SHRIPATI PANDURANG KHADE Vs. ZONAL MANAGER, MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the provisions of the Maharashtra Cotton (Procurement, Processing and Marketing) Act, 1971, the Government of Maharashtra appointed the Maharashtra State Co -operative Marketing Federation Limited ('Federation'), a society, registered under the Co -operative Societies Act, as its agent. The jurisdiction of this Federation extended to various agricultural produce including foodgrains such as Jawar etc. and it was felt that the working of this Federation is becoming unwieldly. In Maharashtra, only certain areas are mainly cotton growing like the Vidarbha area and some portions of Western Maharashtra, and hence Government decided to carve out the operation of the levy of cotton from the other activities of the Federation and assign them to another society siz., the Maharashtra State Co -operative Cotton Growers Federation Limited. This was done sometime in February, 1984.

(2.) DELINEATING the area of operation from the activities the main Federation did involve certain questions of succession and division of labour. By it's letter dated September 8, 1984, Government of Maharashtra in its Agriculture and Co -operative Department, gave certain directions to take effect from September 30, 1984 to the Federation which included transfer of assets and liabilities under the Cotton Growers Scheme, cash and bank balance at Bombay and mofussil areas in the scheme account as well as under the non -scheme account, balance under cash -credit accounts with the Maharashtra State Co -operative Bank and other banks as well as the other legal claims and insurance claims to be transferred to the Cotton Growers Federation. It was also provided that the stock of cotton bales, cotton seed, lint, tarpauline and other moveables as on September 30, 1984 should be transferred to the Cotton Growers Federation after preparing a detailed list. The Cotton Growers Federation was also to take up the liability of loans from the Maharashtra State Co -operative Bank, This letter did not make any reference to the action to be taken as respects the employees whose services have been transferred to the Federation. That was done at a latter date. By letter dated November 9, 1984, the State Government gave directions regarding the positioning of the staff. Such of the members of the staff that were recruited after July 1, 1972 in the cotton scheme were to be placed on deputation without payment of deputation allowance with the Federation. The Federation was expected to absorb the above categories as staff. On August 10, 1984, further directions were given and the staff was divided into two categories. The first category was in respect of the staff working under the Cotton Monopoly Scheme whose services were to be terminated with immediate effect and in any case, not later than August 15, 1984. As far as the 'regular staff' is concerned, it was decided that the staff working in the cotton department of the Federation at Bombay and in the mofussil area should be placed at the disposal of the new organisation i.e. the Cotton Growers Federation on 'As Is Where Is' basis as on July 1, 1984. ('As is where is' is rather an odd way of describing men; it is used for machinery accidented cars etc.) - -

(3.) THE present petitioners along with others were not so absorbed. They moved the Industrial Court at Kolhapur by filing complaints being U.L.P. Nos. 255/84. 14/85, 19/85 and 37/85 in which they alleged that the Co -operative Marketing Federation as well as the Cotton Growers Federation being respondents 1 and 2 engaged in unfair labour practice inasmuch as they tried to terminate the complainants' services inspite of the fact that the complainants have put in a long 12 years service. The complainants then referred to Award No. 213/73 which had directed the Co -operative Marketing Federation to make permanent such of the workers who have put the continuous service of 240 days. All the complainants averred that they have put in such service, but in flagrant breach of the provisions of the Award, the respondents treated them as temporary. The complainants prayed that they may be directed to be made permanent and absorbed in the service of the Cotton Growers Marketing Federation as per the directives of the State Government issued from time to time. The learned Member of the Industrial Court held that the Cotton Growers Federation is a separate creation of the Government of Maharashtra and being a new and separate establishment created for the purpose of implementation of the Cotton Monopoly Scheme, the two Federations are separate juristic persons. The learned Member then proceeded to say that simply because the office premises, furniture etc. is the same, it cannot be said that the Cotton Growers Federation is a part and parcel of Marketing Federation. In view of this finding, the learned Member held that the Award between the employees and the management of the Marketing Federation does not become binding on the Cotton Growers Federation. In view of this finding, the learned Member dismissed the complaints as no act of unfair labour practice was made out. Another set of complaints being U.L.P. Nos. 141, 142, 143, 144, 145 and 146 of 1985 was filed before the Labour Court, Sangli, for claiming interim relief on the basis that the complainants are permanent employees of the Cotton Growers Federation. Interim relief having been refused, revision applications being U.L.P. Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of 1986 were filed before the Member, Industrial Court, Kolhapur. Orders on this batch of revision applications as well as the complaints being U.L.P. Nos. 255/84, 14/85, 19/85 and 37/85 were passed on one and the same day viz., January 30, 1985 by the same Member Mr. Kotnis. Obviously, the reasoning in both the orders is the same viz., that the petitioners cannot claim as of right that they should be absorbed in the Cotton Growers Federation because these two Federations are different. Similar orders have been passed in both these sets of petitions refusing relief to the petitioners giving rise to the present set of Writ Petitions.