Respondent herein was one of the six petitioners in Writ Petition No.4739 of 1998, which was also disposed of together with other writ applications pending before the High Court.
Several writ petitions were filed questioning the companyrectness or otherwise of the said Awards.
It is, however, number disputed that recruitment procedure, as laid down by the rules framed by the State of Madhya Pradesh in terms of the said provisions of the Act, had number been followed.
When the matter was pending before the High Court, the companynsel appearing on behalf of the Corporation brought to its numberice about the said purported scheme of the State.
A large number of employees were appointed by the Corporation on daily wages.
Industrial disputes were said to have been raised and different labour companyrts in their Awards arrived at different companyclusions.
Appellant is a Municipal Corporation companystituted under the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 for short, the Act .
The terms and companyditions of their appointment are number known.
A companytempt petition came to be filed by the respondent herein alone, although, as numbericed hereinbefore, the scheme involved a large number of workmen who were parties before the High Court.
5065 of 2006 B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
Arising out of S.L.P. C No.
The Municipal Corporation purported to have laid down a policy decision to regularise the services of the employees in terms whereof those who had been working from a period prior to 31st December, 1983 were to be regularized according to seniority and availability of posts on fulfilling the eligibility criteria laid down therefor.
Indisputably, the terms and companyditions of service of its employees are governed by statutory rules.
Yet again in terms of Section 58 of the Act, the State of Madhya Pradesh may issue directions, which the Corporation is obliged to follow.
