1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3470 OF 2003 Dy. Conservator of Forests ..Petitioner. Vs. Vijay Shivaji Londhe and others ..Respondents. .... Mr. A.P. Vanarase, AGP for the State – Petitioner. None for the Respondents. ..... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 8th December, 2008. P.C. : 1. The Respondents instituted complaints of unfair labour practices under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The contention of the complainant workmen is that they are daily wagers who had worked for more than 240 days in each year of service. Several of the complainant workmen had filed complaints before the Industrial Court at Nashik for absorption in regular service which were pending. During the pendency of the dispute, the workmen were retrenched on 5th and 6th December, 2001. The retrenchment has been challenged. 2 The Petitioner filed a written statement contending that there are no sanctioned and vacant posts; that the complainant workmen were engaged as daily wagers under a World Bank aided scheme which had come to an end in March 2000. According to the Petitioner, retrenchment was effected in accordance with the seniority list and the complainant workmen had accepted notice of termination and received due compensation. 2. The Labour Court allowed the application for interim relief by directing the Petitioner to temporarily allow the complainant workmen to resume their duties in the usual position or in the alternative to pay them the last drawn wages until disposal of the complaints. The revision application preferred by the Petitioner was dismissed by the Industrial Court on 5th March, 2002. On behalf of the Petitioner it has been submitted that the Labour Court erred in granting an order of reinstatement at the interim stage when the merits of the complaint were still to be adjudicated upon. The workmen were daily wagers appointed under a World Bank aided project and upon the project having ended the workmen were 3 rendered surplus. There were no sanctioned posts available against which the workmen could be continued. 3. There is merit in the submission which has been urged on behalf of the Petitioner. Mere completion of 240 days service would not entitle the workmen to permanent absorption. Each of the workmen prima facie are daily wagers who were appointed against specific schemes which were aided by the World Bank. In the absence of a sanctioned and vacant post the Labour Court was clearly not justified in passing orders which would virtually amount to the grant of final relief in a complaint of unfair labour practices. The Industrial Court was, in the circumstances, in error in dismissing the revision preferred by the Petitioner. The interlocutory order passed by the Labour Court was unsustainable. 4. The Petition will accordingly have to be allowed. The impugned orders passed by the Industrial Court and the Labour Court are quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 4 There shall, however, be no order as to costs. *****