- (1.) These two writ petitions are directed against the common award dated 14/9/2011 passed by Labour Court and Industrial Tribunal, Ajmer, filed by both, the employees association and management of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short, the "LIC") to the extent it is against them. The employees association (shall hereinafter be referred as the "employees association") has assailed the award with the prayer the workman-Anil Mahendru be held entitled to regularization on the post of Comptomist w.e.f. 7/1/1987 and also for payment of wages in terms of the circular dated 25/2/1987 for the period from 6/6/1984 till the date of regularization. The management of the LIC has approached this court with the prayer that the award of the labour court dated dated 14/9/2011 be set-aside in toto. The labour court has answered the reference of the industrial dispute whether action of the management of LIC in denying regularization of the workman Anil Mahendru is just and legal and if not, what relief he is entitled to; holding that such workman is entitled to regularization in services and payment of regular pay scale w.e.f. 1/2/2007, the date on which the reference was made.
(2.) Before proceeding to notice the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it would be appropriate to notice the background facts giving rise to these writ petitions.
(3.) Workman-Anil Mahendru was engaged as a Comtometer Operator / Comptomist, an encadred Class-III post under LIC of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 on temporary basis on 6/6/1984 in the divisional office of LIC at Ajmer. An industrial dispute had arisen at the national level with regard to wages and other conditions of service of Badli, temporary and part time workman of LIC of India as well as conditions of their absorption into regular cadre. Aforesaid industrial dispute was referred by the Government of India to a specially constituted National Industrial Tribunal (shall hereinafter be called as the "Tribunal") chaired by Justice R.D. Tulpule vide Reference dated 20/5/1985. The said Tribunal gave its award on 17/4/1986, which was published in the Gazette of India on 7/6/1986. Pursuant to the said award dated 17/4/1986, LIC issued a circular on 18/9/1986 in which certain guidelines/ criteria of absorption/regular employment for absorption/regular employment of temporary, part time and Badi workmen of the LIC were laid down. According to the workman-Anil Mahendru, he having worked for 85 days in two consecutive years from 1/1/1982 to 20/5/1985 and satisfied the condition of the aforesaid circular and possessed other eligibility qualification, his case therefore should have been considered for absorption/regular appointment. LIC however rejected his case vide order dated 9/8/1986 on the premise that he was working on contract basis. The employees association submitted a composite representation for number of workmen including above workman-Anil Mahendru to the LIC on 16/10/1986 objecting to rejection of the case of workman-Anil Mahendru for absorption/regular employment. Senior Divisional Manager Divisional Office, LIC of India, Ajmer communicated the petitioner vide letter dated 29/10/1986 that his case cannot be considered for absorption/regular employment as he worked only on contract basis. Association submitted another representation on 5/11/1986 raising the similar issue. The LIC then issued another circular on 25/2/1987 stipulating other things that every part time/temporary and Badli workmen should be given wages as are drawn by the regular employees at the minimum of the pay scale applicable to the respective categories. It further provided that these benefits are to be given to the temporary/badli and regular part time workmen w.e.f. 1/1/1982 or from the date of appointment, whichever is later.;