[701]



SOMMAIRES

CONTENTS



Page

..

702

Sentence arbitral du travail

.. 702

Award of the Labour Court

.. 702

de tribunal



704

Notifications du Gouvernement .. 704

Government Notifications

.. 704



707

Avis d’ appel d’ offres

.. 707

Tender Notices

.. 707



708

Etablissements dangereux

.. 708

Dangerous Establishments

708



709

Annonces

.. 709

Announcements

709



La Gazette de L' État de Poudouchéry

The Gazette of Puducherry



Publiée par Autorité

Published by Authority







2024 }

|

15 {

No.

Poudouchéry

Mardi

Octobre

2024 (23 Asvina 1946)

No.

Puducherry

Tuesday

15th

October

2024

Registered with the Registrar

of Newspapers for India

under No. 10410

702

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[15 October 2024

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

(G.O. Rt. No. 78/AIL/Lab./S/2024,

Puducherry, dated 23rd September 2024)

NOTIFICATION

Whereas, an Award in I.D. (L) No. 03/2021, dated

04-03-2024 of the Labour Court, Puducherry, in respect

of the industrial dispute between the M/s. Vinayaka

Missions Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal and

the Union for All Staff in Vinayaka Mission Medical

College and Hospital, over regularization of Staff Nurse

working on fixed term employment, to Pay Scale,

ex gratia allowances, grant promotion on par with other

permanent Staff Nurses etc., has been received;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred

by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947), read with

the notification issued in Labour Department’s

G.O. Ms. No. 20/9/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991, it is hereby

directed by the Secretary to Government (Labour), that

the said Award shall be published in the Official

Gazette, Puducherry.

(By order)

S. SANDIRAKUMARAN,

Under Secretary to Government (Labour).

————

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT AT PUDUCHERRY

Present : Tmt. G.T. Ambika, M.L., PGDCLCF.,

Presiding Officer.

Monday, the 04th day of March 2024

I.D(L). No. 03/2021

The President,

Union for All Staff in Vinayaka

Missions Medical College and Hospital,

Karaikal.

. . Petitioner

Versus

The Management,

M/s. Vinayaka Missions Medical

College and Hospital,

Karaikal.

. . Respondent

This industrial dispute coming on this day before

me for hearing in the presence of Thiruvalargal

S. Karthikeyan, Counsel, appearing for petitioner and

Thiruvalargal R. Ilancheliyan, R. Thilagavathi, Counsels

for the respondent and upon hearing the learned

Counsel for petitioner and respondent and on perusing

the entire records of the case, having stood over for

consideration till this date, this Court delivered the

following:

AWARD

1. This Industrial Dispute arises out of the reference

made by the Government of Puducherry vide G.O. Rt.

No. 29/Lab./AIL/T/2021, dated 08-04-2021 of the Labour

Department, Puducherry, to resolve the following

dispute between the Petitioner and the Respondent, viz.,

(i) Whether the dispute raised by the Union workmen

represented by Union for All Staff in Vinayaka

Mission’s Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal,

against the Management of M/s. Vinayaka Missions

Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal, over

regularization of Staff Nurse working on fixed term

employment to pay salary, ex gratia allowances, grant

promotion on par with other permanent Staff

Nurses etc., are justified or not? If justified, what

relief she is entitled to?

(ii) To compute the relief, if any, awarded in terms

of money if, it can be so computed?

2. The averments set forth in the claim statement is

as follows :

The petitioner submits that this claim petition is

filed for regularization of Staff Nurses on fixed term

contract and equal pay. The petitoner Union is registered

Union under the Trade Union Act and representing

on behalf of the 200 Staff Nurses of the Union. The

Industrial Dispute was filed to give equal pay for

equal work, ex gratia allowances, to give promotion

and all other benefits and privileges equally with the

other 9 permanent staffs to follow and implement the

Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, other constitutional

grantees legal rights other beneficial registration

framed by the parliament for protection of the rights

and interests of petitioner herein.

(ii) The 200 Staff Nurses are working for the

upliftment of VMMC Hospital for the past 18 years.

The respondent had made only 9 Staff Nurses

permanent in out of 200 Staff Nurses. The 200 Nurses

have been working in the same places performing

equal work on par with other 9 permanent Staff

Nurses. Unfortunately, the petitioner was receiving

unequal pay and the petitioners are not promoted on

equal to the other 9 Staff Nurses. The power

exercised by the respondent herein is colourable

exercise of powers. Respondent’s arbitrariness

against the petitioner resulted in denial of equal

pay for equal work, ex gratia allowances,

promotions and other benefits which is against the

settled laws of land. The respondent categorically

703

15 October 2024]

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

admitted that the petitioners were equal on par with

the 9 permanent staffs. While the respondent herein

have admitted by availing all the C.L., E.L., M.L.,

CCL., privileges to the 200 Staff Nurses equal to the

9 permanent staffs, the 200 Staff Nurses are entitled

for permanent posts.

(iii) The permanent 9 staffs are receiving ex gratia

allowances on festival seasons but, the petitioners

were denied for the ex gratia allowances. Therefore,

the respondent had acting highhandedly and

perpetuating discrimination among the employees. As

far as the engagement of fixed term employees are

concerned their engagement of fixed term employees

are concerned their engagement is purely under the

provisions of the Industrial Employment Standing

Order Act, which has been legally approved by the

Government. The petitioners submits that so far the

respondent herein had not made any standing orders

for the welfare of the petitioners herein, since there

is no standing order, it is not legally approved by

the Government. Therefore, the petitioners deny the

contention of the respondent that the fixed term

employees were engaged purely under the provisions

of the Industrial Employment Standing Order Act.

Therefore, respondents were put into strict proof to

prove existing of the Industrial Employment Standing

Order Act and legally approved by the Government,

if any.

(iv) The petitioner submits that it shall be noted

that the right to equality has been declared by

Supreme Court as basic feature of the Constitution.

Article 14 states that all persons similarly situated

or under similar circumstances shall be treated alike

and equal laws should have to be applied to all in

the same situation and there should be no

discrimination between one person and another

if, their position is substantially the same. The

petitioner submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court

of India held in Krishna Kumar Vs. UP SFEC

Corporation (1994) III LLJ (sup) 254 (SC) it is stated

that even if, the employee appointed on fixed term

contract basis and such contract has been renewed

from time to time, is right to claim for regular

employment cannot be negated by way of contract.

Therefore, from the abovesaid judgment, it is very

clear that the petitioner were entitled for permanent

employment in the work place. Therefore, the

respondent’s counter filed on 04-03-2015 were

vexatious and frivolous and against the settled law

of Supreme Court of India.

(v) The petitioner herein submits that they had

completed 240 days continued service in the

calendar year. The records shall prove that all the

petitioners had continued service in the calendar

year. Therefore, the petitioners here are entitled to

permanent post in their work place and equal pay for

equal work and entitled for ex gratia allowances,

promotion and all other benefits and privileges on

par with the permanent staffs.

2. The averments set forth in the counter is as

follows :

The respondent herein denies the averments made

by the petitioner in the claim statement are absolutely

false and not maintainable under law. The respondent

is confined to file the reply statement only to the

matter relating to the terms of reference and the

petitioner’s contention in their claim statement is not

related to the issues as per the terms of reference,

the basic issue to be decided by the Hon’ble

Tribunal is whether the demand of the petitioner

Union over regularization of Staff Nurse working on

fixed term employment to pay salary ex gratia

allowances, grant promotions are justified or not. The

respondent management is running a medical college

and hospital and providing medical education as per

the guidelines and control by the National Medical

Commission. The recognition given are not permanent

in nature and it is subject to renewal from time to

time.

(ii) The respondent institution is having 3 Union

namely, 1. Vinayaka Missions Medical College and

Hospital Non-teaching Staff Union, 2. Union for All

Staff in Vinayaka Missions Medical College and

Hospital and 3. Vinayaka Missions Thozhilalar

Munnetra Sangam. Out of the abovesaid three

Unions, the petitioner Union was defeated when the

Commissioner of Labour conducted an election as per

the direction of the Hon’ble Madras High Court to

recognize the majority Union and only the Vinayaka

Missions Medical College and Hospital Non-teaching

Staff Union was declared to be the majority Union

recognized for purpose of negotiating with the

respondent management. Therefore, there is no

genuine in their approach or they do not have any

locus standi to raise this dispute. Right from the

establishment of Medical College there were lot of

industrial unrest and there were Union affiliated to

different political groups. Only in such a situation,

the respondent management contemplated to engage

Nurses and other staff members temporarily on fixed

term basis for the betterment of service to the

patients and students and therefore, the service of

the employees engaged on fixed term basis is brought

under the regular category it will not be conducive

in the interest of the student and hospital as a whole.

Therefore, the respondent management does not

have any legal obligations to regularize the service

of the employees employed on fixed term contract

basis.

704

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[15 October 2024

(iii) The respondent management is having

multi-cadre employees in different categories and

have regular and fixed term basis and such are those

employees engaged on fixed terms basis are engaged

on mutual consent. The petitioners claim to pay

wages under the equal remuneration act is a wrong

conception projected before this Court. As far as the

payment of equal wages is concerned it is purely

based on education, experience and nature of work

in various category, therefore, the allegation of the

petitioner that there is discrimination of wages is

absolutely false. The respondent management does

not have any legal obligations to regularize the

Nurses engaged on fixed term basis and if, their

services are made permanent it will hamper the

smooth running of the institution and hospital, and

will cause irreparable loss to the respondent

management. Hence, prays for the dismissal.

4. Points for consideration:

1. Whether the dispute raised by the petitioner

Union is justified?

2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled for the relief

as prayed in the claim petition?

5. On points:

This Court finds that in I.A.No. 2/2023 this Court

has recorded the minutes of meeting, dated 31-01-2023

signed by the Management and the authorised Staff

Nurses. It is the contention of the Staff Nurses that

as per the above Minutes Meeting, dated 31-01-2023,

the dispute involved in the present case has been

resolved and the terms entered in the abovesaid

minutes has been given effect and also extended to

all other Staff Nurses on fixed terms working in the

respondent management. Hence, this Court in view

of above discussions holds that there does not

survive anything in this petition for further

consideration.

In the result, this petition is disposed in terms of

Minutes of Meeting held on 31-01-2023. The letter, dated

27-01-2023, Authorization Letter, dated 27-10-2023 and

Minutes of Meeting, dated 31-01-2023 shall form part

and parcel of this Award. There is no order as to costs.

Partly typed by the Stenographer, partly typed by me

in my laptop, corrected and pronounced by me in the

open Court, on this 04th day of March, 2024.

G.T. AMBIKA,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

DIRECTORATE OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS

No. 7022/DOS/EC-II/Training/2024.

Puducherry, dated 26th September 2024.

NOTIFICATION

In pursuance of the G.O. Rt. No. 09, dated 15-07-2024

of the Department of Revenue and Disaster Management,

the following Revenue Officials who have undergone

the Survey and Settlement Training as I-Batch

(Puducherry District) for the Financial year 2024-25 for

36 working days in the Directorate of Survey and Land

Records, Saram, Puducherry, with effect from 22-07-2024

to 11-09-2024, are declared successful in the concluding

Survey Training Tests conducted on 09th and 10th

September, 2024.

N.B : Request from unsuccessful candidates as to

the cause of failure or revaluation of Survey

Training Test papers will not be entertained.

Sl.

Name and designation

Name of the

No.

office in

which working

(1)

(2)

(3)

Tmt./Selvi/Thiru:

R. Rajalakshmi,

Taluk Office,

Deputy Tahsildar.

Puducherry.

P. Kathirval,

Taluk Office,