1 apeal250.07.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 250 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 323 OF 2004 Mahapalika Arogya Seva Karmachari Sanghatana, Mumbai ...Appellant Vs. Commissioner, Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika, Mumbai & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. P.S. Devdas for the Appellant. Mr. P.M. Palshikar with Ms. T.H. Puranik for the Respondents. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 1ST MARCH 2011. P.C. 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order of learned Single Judge of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 323 of 2004 dated September 26, 2006. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition by confirming the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The appellant union raised industrial dispute in connection with giving permanency to 71 workmen by the Municipal Corporation. On appreciation of evidence, it has been found that the concerned workmen were appointed by voluntary organizations. It is found that there is no relationship of employer and employee between the employees on whose behalf the appellant raised grievance and the Municipal Corporation. The Industrial Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge of this Court both found that the 2 apeal250.07.sxw benefit of permanency cannot be given to the concerned workmen. It has been observed by the learned Single Judge in para 4 of the impugned order as follows: " On the state of the record as it stands, the Industrial Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the Municipal Corporation cannot be ordered to grant permanency in service. The workmen concerned were appointed by the concerned Voluntary Organization. The Municipal Corporation which was implementing the project with the assistance of the Work Bank was required to provide conditions of eligibility in order to ensure that only persons who met the prescribed norms participated as health providers in the program. The Municipal Corporation decided to discontinue the assistance to Private Volunary Organizations on and after 1st October, 2003. On behalf of the Petitioners an effort has been made to submit that in the present case, the relationship of employer and employee was between the workmen and the Municipal Corporation. This is ex facie belied by the admission made by the witness who deposed on behalf of the petitioners that the letters of appointment were not issued by the Municipal Corporation, but by the Voluntary Organizations concerned. In a project such as the one which is the subject matter of the present case, a government Organization is entitled to scrutinize the credentials of those appointed by a Voluntary Organization. The absence of adequate credentials will reflect upon the health of the community which is intended to be protected by the project. None of the concerned workmen was appointed by the Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation which is a public body, is governed by well established norms, including reservations in respect of post under its control. 2. In our view, the learned Single Judge has given cogent reasons for coming to the conclusion that no such benefit can be given. The findings recorded by the Tribunal as well as learned Single Judge are not required to be interfered by this Court in LPA, especially when we do not find any error of law in the impugned orders passed by the learned single Judge of this 3 apeal250.07.sxw Court and the concerned Tribunal. Hence dismissed. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) (P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.)