Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 679 (HP)

PRAKASH CHAND v. HP STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD

2013-07-23

A.M.KHANWILKAR, KULDIP SINGH

body2013
Judgment : A.M. Khanwilkar, J. - 1. Heard counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. Counsel for the respondents waives notice. As short question is involved, the petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent. 2. This petition can be disposed of by re-iterating the direction given by the Division Bench of this Court in Bilu Ram vs. State of HP and others, CWP No. 9440 of 2012, and connected cases decided on 20th December, 2012. The operative order in the said judgment reads thus: "9. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of as follows: In case any of the petitioners has a case that he has been retrenched without following the procedure under the Industrial Disputes Act and in case the employer requires additional manpower on account of additional work requiring the engagement of fresh hands, he may make an appropriate representation offering himself for engagement, subject to verification of the factual position regarding the retrenchment, the additional work, requirement of fresh hands etc., appropriate action shall be taken by the employer concerned for considering the case of the petitioners, subject to their fitness and being within the cut off age for such engagement. However, we make it clear that in view of the submissions made by the learned Deputy Advocate General that they are already having surplus manpower and in view of the submissions made by the learned standing counsel appearing for the Electricity Board that they do not require any fresh hands, any such fresh engagement shall be made only after getting approval from the Executive Director (Personnel) of the Electricity Board and Engineer-in-Chief/Head of the Department as far as PWD/I and PH department as the case may be. We also make it clear that this judgment shall not stand in the case of any of the petitioners, if so desire, taking recourse to the remedy, if any, under the Industrial Disputes Act. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) have expressed an apprehension that it is difficult for the poor workmen to get to know of the vacancies and hence, it may not be possible for them to offer themselves for re-engagement. We make it clear that the respondents shall not take recourse to engagement of any fresh daily wager without duly notifying such vacancies. 11. We make it clear that the respondents shall not take recourse to engagement of any fresh daily wager without duly notifying such vacancies. 11. With these observations, the present writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No cost." This writ petition is disposed of on the same terms, so also the pending applications, if any.