Long-Term Casual Workers Performing Essential Duties Are Entitled To Regularization, Reduction In Workload Not Valid Ground To Deny It : Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court comprising of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) held that long-term casual workers performing essential duties are entitled to regularization, and a reduction in workload is not a valid ground to deny it. Background Facts The petitioner (Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.) supplied fuel against consideration to the aircrafts of various companies at the Aviation Fuel Station (AFS) of Dum Dum Airport. The aviation fuel from the Mourigram Terminal (nearest terminal from AFS) previously was carried by tank trucks to the AFS. Since October 2018, by reason of a policy decision of the management, the entire process of completion of decantation, closing of all the valves of pipeline and receipt tank closure by workmen was changed because of transportation of the fuel from Mourigram Terminal to AFS Dum Dum through pipelines. The job of checking the refuellers at the time of transportation of the fuel from the storage tank to the aircrafts was done by the crew in the refuellers/vehicles. The job of maintenance of refuellers/vehicles was largely outsourced. The trade union contended that the seven workmen named in the order of reference were treated as casual workers of IOCL. However, given the regular nature of their duties in continual work at IOCL, they ought to be regularized in its service. The conciliation proceedings ended in a failure, therefore the Central Government referred the industrial dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication. It was held by the Tribunal that the introduction of supply aviation fuel directly to the storage at Dum Dum Airport through pipelines w.e.f. October, 2018 was immaterial for determination of the case. More so, the issue under reference was with regard to the regularisation of the service of seven workmen engaged directly by IOCL as casual labourers. Accordingly, the petition filed by the management was rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an application against the order dated 17th September, 2024 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata. It was contended by the petitioner that the introduction of the pipeline system of filling up the storage tank has substantially decreased the work load of the IOCL personnel. The previous system of receiving tank trucks at AFS and processing necessary documents and quality control papers and then filling the storage tanks on checking the density and temperature and subsequent connection of the decantation hose with the tank trucks and opening of TT outlet valves and storage inlet valves was done away with. The entire process of completion of decantation, closing of all the valves of pipelines and receipt tank closure by workmen has been changed because of transportation of the fuel through pipelines. It was further stated that by reason of easing out of the system of refuelling of the storage tanks, there is hardly any work or requirement of permanent workmen and this work could also be done through outsourcing/private contractors. On the other hand, the Government of India made some references: Whether the seven workmen had ever been engaged by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL) as casual labourers? If so, whether demand for regularization of their services in the IOCL is just & legal? What relief they are entitled to and from which date. Findings of the Court The case of Jaggo vs Union of India & Ors. was relied upon by the court wherein the Supreme Court held that while the foundational purpose of temporary contracts may have been to address short-term or seasonal needs, they have increasingly become a mechanism to evade long-term obligations owed to employees. It set a significant precedent for the regularization of long-serving temporary employees in government institutions. It was further held that lengthy and uninterrupted service in essential functions warrant regularization, even if initial appointments were irregular. The misuse of temporary or part-time labels to deny employees their rightful claims is unacceptable and contrary to principles of fairness and equity. The decision discouraged the exploitation of workers through temporary contracts and arbitrary terminations, encouraging government institutions to adhere to fair employment practices. Further the guidelines for regularization of a casual worker were provided where following factors are to be considered: length of service; working in the vacancy of a permanent post; whether the worker carried out the duties of a regular employee for a substantial period of his service; reduction of workload while still being employed as a casual worker on a regular basis for a considerable period is not a relevant factor in determining a casual worker's right to claim regularization. In the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others vs. Umadevi and others, the Supreme Court held that employees in irregular appointments, who were...

Long-Term Casual Workers Performing Essential Duties Are Entitled To Regularization, Reduction In Workload Not Valid Ground To Deny It : Calcutta HC

Namdev Singh

Tags