Source: http://mpemployees.com/judgments/details/t-nadu-termd-full-time-tem-lic-emp-assn-vs-life-insurance-corp-of-india-ors
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 08:27:00+00:00

Document:
﻿ T.NADU TERMD.FULL TIME TEM.LIC EMP.ASSN. Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORP.OF INDIA & ORS.
offices and Divisions of the Corporation.
relief the workmen are entitled?"
by the NIT will still be operative in law.
scale and revised pay scale from time to time by the Corporation.
Accordingly, the appeals are allowed in the above said terms.
(for short "the CGIT") in I.D. No.27 of 1991.
reference case vide order dated 06.04.1995.
Kanpur were the only parties  to  the  reference  besides  the  Corporation.
workmen stating that no benefit would be claimed.
paras 40 to 60 and 66 of the Award of Justice R.D. Tulpule.
at various places in the Award can be interpreted in mean "recruitment".
Tulpule that absorption of workmen does not mean recruitment.
High Court of Madras between the years 1989 to 1991. The writ  petition  No.
employees eligible in their service in accordance with the said Scheme.
Corporation filed C.A. No. 2104 of 2000 titled LIC of India  &  Ors.  v.  G.
(supra) will also be applicable to the case of G. Sudhakar and Ors.
from the industrial dispute raised by the concerned workmen  in  this  case.
absorption in their respective posts.
against the Awards of the NIT by  Justice  R.D.  Tulpule  and  Justice  S.M.
Scheme was as per the decision in the case of State of  Haryana  &  Ors.  v.
reiterated in the decision of this Court in  G.  Sudhakar  &  Ors.  (supra).
assigning his reasons in judgment and order passed by him.
the High Court, the concerned workmen challenged the same by  filing  L.P.A.
Court in the decisions of E. Prabhavathy &  Ors.  and  G.  Sudhakar  &  Ors.
appeals urging various legal grounds.
Justice R.D. Tulpule, the same being clarified and affirmed by Justice  S.M.
for absorption in terms of the direction given in the Award of Justice  R.D.
by the NIT are binding between the parties under Section 18(3) of  the  Act.
therefore the Awards are operative and binding in law upon the parties.
The aforesaid contentions, are rebutted by the learned  senior  counsel  Mr.
exercise of its Appellate Jurisdiction.
the wage to such workman.
of Labour to Justice S. M. Jamdar to  clarify  the  Award  of  Justice  R.D.
country. Therefore, it does not amount to recruitment.
conditions of the compromise arrived between the  parties  in  the  SLP  No.
arose before the Privy Council in Moses v. Parker Ex-parte Moses(1896(  A.C.
exercised in an arbitrary or capricious manner.
bargaining and is more akin to administrative than to judicial function.
labour disputes, this Court  in  Western  India  Automobile  Association  v.
the Award in favour of the concerned workmen.
framed as per the decision of this Court in the case of State of Haryana  v.
regular recruitment in the normal course."
incorporating the essential features of the Scheme as a part of  its  order.
accrue to the respondent after March 31, 1959 must therefore be rejected."
the Award of the CGIT.
perennial nature of work and continuing them as such for  number  of  years.
Central Government in favour of the concerned workmen is  legal  and  valid.
rule of law and meaning and significance to  the  ideal  of  welfare  State"
- State of Mysore v. Workers of Gold Mines AIR 1958 SC 923."
of Jasmer Singh v. State Of Haryana & Anr. (C.A. No. 346 OF 2015).
set aside.  Accordingly, it is set aside.
these cases. The same is appreciated and placed on record.
of the same shall be submitted for perusal of this Court.
applications are disposed of. No costs.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.