The said seniority list is Annexure D to the writ petitions filed by the respondents in the High Court.
The annual increment list, also D prepared by the appellant, shows that the respondents have been in the service of the appellant on monthly salaries and they were given annual increments on November 1, 1985.
Being aggrieved by the order of the Industrial Court, the respondents filed writ petitions before the High Court and, as stated already, the High Court allowed the writ petitions and quashed the order of the Industrial Court.
Upon the said findings, the Industrial Court dismissed the companyplaints of the respondents.
It has been already numbericed that under the Award of the Industrial Tribunal, the respondents were declared the permanent employees of the Marketing Federation.
PG NO 474 From the Judgment and Order dated 9/10.3.1987 of the Bombay High Court in W.P. Nos.
the Maharashtra State Cooperative Cotton Growers Marketing Federation Ltd., the appellant in all these appeals.
Hence these appeals.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No 3719 3721 of l988.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Dr. R.S. Kulkarni, Jitender Sharma, D.M. Nargolkar and S. Bhasme for the Respondents.
The appellant has prepared a seniority list for the year 1985 86 which shows that most of the respondents have been in the employment of the Marketing Federation since 1972.
The Government of Maharashtra appointed the Maharashtra State Cooperative Marketing Federation, hereinafter referred to as the Marketing Federation, the Chief Agent in the Cotton Monopoly Scheme under the provision of section 42 of tile Maharashtra Raw Cotton Procurement Process of Marketing Act, 1971.
These appeals preferred by the appellant, the Maharashtra State Cooperative Cotton Growers Marketing Federation Ltd., are directed against the judgment of the Bombay High Court whereby the High Court allowed the writ petitions of the respondents and quashed the order of the Industrial Court Maharashtra Kolhapur Bench , Kolhapur, dismissing the companyplaints filed by the respondents.
The activities of the Marketing Federation extended to various agricultural produce including foodgrains.
Further, it was held by the Industrial Court that there was numberunfair PG NO 476 labour practice on the part of the Marketing Fedration or the appellant and that, in any event, the companyplaints were barred by limitation as the same were filed beyond 90 days from the date of the knowledge of the respondents that they were appointed by the appellant as seasonal employees.
Ramaswamy, Additional Solicitor General and A.M. Khanwilkar for the Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT, J. Special is granted.
620, 622 and 621 of 1986.
In February, 1984 the Government carved out the operation of the levy of companyton from the other activities of the Marketing Federation and assigned them to another society, namely.
In a subsequent letter dated September 8, 1984 the Marketing Federation was directed to effect the transfer of the chief agency from the Marketing Federation to the appellant, inter alia by transferring all the assets and liabilities under the scheme account and the cash and Bank balance at Bombay and Mofussil under the scheme account as well as under the number scheme account to the appellant etc.
