SUJAN BANERJEE Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(CAL)-2000-8-30
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on August 16,2000

SUJAN BANERJEE Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) The writ petitioners are sixteen in number. Their case as made out in this application is that the respondent No. 6 initially appointed petitioner Nos. 1 to 15 as Data Entry Operators and petitioner No. 16 as Peon and deployed them as such in the International Air Cargo Complex (Import and Export Division) of Calcutta Customs at the Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport ("NSCBI") on December 18, 1998 after execution of an agreement of sub-contract between the respondent No. 4 and the said respondent No. 6. However no appointment letter was issued in their favour by the said respondent No 6.
(2.) Subsequently, the said sub-contract was terminated and a new sub-contract was given to respondent No. 5. After the creation of such new "sub-contract, the respondent No. 5 assigned the same job to the petitioners with the difference that appointment letters were issued to the petitioners on April 26, 2000. Thereafter, the respondent No. 6 issued order of transfer of the petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 on June 23, 2000 asking them to join Chinchura checkpost from July 1, 2000. In the meantime on May 27, 2000 the petitioners gave a representation to the respondent No. 5 requesting the said respondent not to transfer them to any other place but inspite of such representation, the respondent No. 5 not only transferred the petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 but by subsequent letter dated July 18, 2000 threatened to initiate disciplinary proceeding for not joining at the place on transfer.
(3.) Under such circumstances, the petitioners came forward with this writ application claiming the following reliefs: "a) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding and/or directing the respondents authorities to regularise and/or absorb the petitioners in the service of the customs authorities for the post of Data Entry Operators in respect of the petitioners No. 1 to 15 and peon in the case of petitioner No. 16 and to act in accordance with law; b) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding and/or directing the respondents No. 1 and 2 to consult with the Central Board under the provisions of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 for prohibition of employment of contract labour in the job undertaken by the petitioners which is of perennial nature in the establishment of the respondent No. 3, by notification in the Official Gazette and to direct for regularisation and/or absorption of the petitioners in the service of the respondent No. 3 following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Air India Statutory Corporation v. United Labour Union and Ors., followed by the decision reported in Secretary, Haryana State Electricity Board v. Suresh and Ors. and to act in accordance with law; c) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Certiorari do issue commanding and/or directing the respondents and each of them their servants and/or agents to transmit and/or certify the record relating to the instant case so that conscionable justice may be rendered; d) An appropriate writ or direction do issue for production of all the relevant records and/or protection of all the rights of the petitioners and for granting the petitioners such reliefs as in the circumstances shall be just; e) Rule NISI in terms of prayers (a) to (d) above. f) Injunction to issue restraining the respondents No. 4 and 5 and each of them their servants and/or agents from transferring the petitioners Nos. 1 and 4 to elsewhere in the terms of the transfer orders dated June 23, 2000 being Annexure E-5 hereof and taking any action in terms of letter dated July 18, 2000 in Annexure P-6 hereof till the disposal of the application. g) An injunction do issue restraining the respondents and each of them their servants and/or agents from in any manner terminating and dispensing with the service of the petitioners till the disposal of the application; h) Ad interim order in terms of prayers (f) and (g) above; i) Suitable Order as to costs be made; j) Such further or other order or orders be made and/or direction or directions be given as would afford complete relief to your petitioners.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.