- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Madras High Court
- /
- As Long As There Is A Manpower...
As Long As There Is A Manpower Requirement By The Employer, The Employee's Services Should Be Utilized Without Resorting To Replacing With Casual Workers: Madras HC
Manvir Ahluwalia
9 May 2024 1:00 PM GMT
A Single-Judge bench of Madras High Court comprising of Justice Battu Devanand while deciding a writ petition in the case of P. Elilarasan v. The Executive Director, Air India Ltd. & Ors. has held that as long as there is a manpower requirement by the employer, the services of the employee ought to be utilized and at no point of time should he be replaced by any other causal...
A Single-Judge bench of Madras High Court comprising of Justice Battu Devanand while deciding a writ petition in the case of P. Elilarasan v. The Executive Director, Air India Ltd. & Ors. has held that as long as there is a manpower requirement by the employer, the services of the employee ought to be utilized and at no point of time should he be replaced by any other causal arrangement by resorting to employ other persons.
Background of Facts
P. Elilarasan (Petitioner) who had been working as a casual helper in Air India Ltd (Respondent) since 1993, with the nature of work being permanent and perennial. However, Air India engaged in the practice of hiring workers for short periods, denying them permanent status and associated benefits. Consequently, the Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to be absorbed with full attendance benefits.
The Petitioner contended that despite working continuously as a casual helper at Air India Limited since 1993, he had been denied permanent status and its associated benefits. It was also contended that the Petitioner's work is of a permanent nature and should not be subject to short-term engagements. Moreover, the Petitioner placed reliance on an earlier order of this court, arguing that it applied to the facts of this case.
The respondent party accepted the application of the order to the facts of this case.
Findings of the Court
The court observed that the Petitioners' employment should be maintained as long as there is a genuine requirement for their services by the Respondent. The court also emphasized that the Petitioners should not be replaced by casual arrangements and that their employment should continue with the terms and conditions stipulated by the Respondent. Additionally, the court prohibited the termination of the petitioners' employment through unfair means or labour practices.
With the aforementioned observations, the court dismissed the petition.
Case: P. Elilarasan v. The Executive Director, Air India Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 191
Case No. W.P. No. 10966/2018
Counsels for the Petitioner: Mr. S. Gunaseelan
Counsel for the Respondent: No Appearance
