"We Are Given Step-Motherly Treatment"; 234 Contract Workers From Consumer Fora Move Supreme Court Seeking Parity With Their High Courts, District Courts Counterparts

234 contract workers of ConsumerForums/Commissions across India, who are working as Technical Support Staff under a third-party contract, have filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking parity with their counterparts working at various High Courts and District Courts.The plea states that the basic grievance of the Petitioners is that "the technical support staff, working with respective Consumer Forums/Commissions across India under a outsource arrangement are being given step-motherly treatment as compared to the staff working with the other judicial Forums/Commissions such as High Court, District Court, NCLT, NCDRC, Human Rights Commission, NCW etc". It has been submitted that as per the August 2005 national policy and action plan for implementation of information and communication technology in Indian Judiciary and the guidelines laid down for appointment of various staff, most High Courts and District Courts across India have absorbed their existing technical staff. However, in the case of the technical staff of the Consumer Forums/Commissions, they are hired through third-party contractors on a year-to-year basis which is subject to renewal depending upon the whims and fancies of the contractor. "The present Petitioners are desirous of being treated equally at par to technical support staff, hired and employed by various High Courts and District Courts and hence, filing this petition before this Hon'ble Court for fixed tenure and fixed compensation for all the technical support staff of various consumers' court and frame the guidelines accordingly". The plea further goes on to argue that the President of the District Consumer Commissions and State Commissions should have the sole discretion to appoint the staff after consultation with the State Commission or National Commission, and there must a be stoppage to the interference of the State Government with direct appointments being made by the Commissions itself. A table has been provided in the plea to drive home the point that as per High Court Rules and even for various other Tribunals, Commissions and other judicial bodies, the appointment of technical staff is on the basis of the sole discretion of the District Judge and the Presiding Judge respectively, as a result of which, at least for District Court, they never face any shortage of staff during to pending approvals from the Governments. In light of the above, the plea prays for directions to make the national policy of the E-Committee of the Supreme Court applicable to Consumer Commissions, and for the framing of guidelines for the purpose of appointment of staff in these Commissions with reduced interference from the Government. It further prays for directions for absorption of existing Technical Staff/Petitioners as per the guidelines laid down in the National Policy and Action Plan document Phase-1 of the e-Courts Project. The plea has been filed and drafted by Advocates Om Prakash Parihar and Dushyant Tiwari.(Case : Mandeep Singh and others vs Union of India and others)

"We Are Given Step-Motherly Treatment"; 234 Contract Workers From Consumer Fora Move Supreme Court Seeking Parity With Their High Courts, District Courts Counterparts

Radhika Roy

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Radhika Roy

"We Are Given Step-Motherly Treatment"; 234 Contract Workers From Consumer Fora Move Supreme Court Seeking Parity With Their High Courts, District Courts Counterparts

Radhika Roy

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Radhika Roy

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers