The Bombay High Court in the case Ashok Bhikanrao Deshmukh v. State of Maharashtra and Ors observed that the workers under the Employment Guarantee Scheme, EGS are not entitled to continued employment or regularisation.
The Court in the case observed and has refused to grant absorption in service to a 60-year-old man who worked for two years under EGS as a Mustering Assistant.
The Division bench comprising of Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice YG Khobragade at Aurangabad in the case observed that the workers working on the EGS are not a part of the process of recruitment and they neither have a right for continued employment, nor can they file ULP complaints under the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 for claiming regularisation or permanency, thus, nor can they raise an Industrial Dispute on account of being discontinued from the EGS.
The court in the case observed and has dismissed the writ plea moved by the man granting compensation for an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs to the petitioner considering that he had been litigating for 37 years and was now 60 years of age.
In the present case, the petitioner, one Ashok Deshmukh, sought absorption under a Government Resolution, GR dated 01.12.1995, for absorption of Mustering Assistants in Government services.
Therefore, the petitioner was appointed under EGS on daily wages from 01.11.1985 to 11.02.1987. thus, the petitioner was orally terminated on 11.02.1987 and the labour court award on March 29, 1996, granted him reinstatement with continuity from 11.02.1987.
The High Court in 2019 observed and has quashed the labour court award.
However, the petitioner was permitted to represent his case under the ambit of the GR dated December 01, 1995.
The State via order dated 27.10.2010 concluded that the petitioner was ineligible for absorption, citing his non-employment on the cut-off date of 31.05.1993. thus, he filed the present plea.
The counsel, Advocate BR Warma appering for the petitioner in the case obserevd and drew the attention to three juniors who were absorbed in service under the same Government Resolution even though they were not in employment as on 31.05.1996.
The State relied on an affidavit-in-reply filed on 01.07.2011, by then Deputy Collector, EGS, Dhule.
Therefore, the affidavit emphasized that the mentioned candidates had court orders in their favour and he stated that the petitioner was a temporary worker during specific periods in 1985 and 1986.
It has also been submitted by him before the court that as per Clause 3.1 of the Government Resolution, only those Mustering Assistants who were in continuous service as on 31.05.1993, and whose names were included in the seniority list could be considered.
The court in the case cited Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar v. Daulat Narsingrao Deshmukh and the case Arvind G. Chaudhari v. Dhanraj Nathu Patil to emphasize that EGS workers are not entitled to relief under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 or the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The court in the case noted that the petitioner was working on EGS for limited durations over two calendar years and had put in around 370 days. Clauses 1.2 and 3.1 of the Government Resolution disentitled him from seeking regularisation.
The court in the case observed and has relied on the supreme court judgement wherein the court awarded an amount of Rs. 40,000/- to 50,000/- per year of services to employees who worked for a very short period and were out of employment for a long duration as reinstatement in service or absorption would be impracticable.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case observed and has directed the Executive Engineer, Public Works Division to deposit Rs. 2 Lakhs in court within sixty days.
The court granted the liberty to withdraw the amount, subject to proper identification by the representing advocate and the submission of necessary documents.