Contract Employee no Different. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on 29 April 2019, delivered a Judgement that went on to clarify the distinction if any, of a person employed by the principal or through a contractor.

The blogger hopes that this would give some relief to the many employees on contract, differentiated on the basis, contrary to the law. 

"The word “employee” as defined in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 means any

person who is employed for hire or reward in a scheduled employment." reminds the judgement.

The Supreme Court finds, according to the Act, "no distinction made between a person employed by the principal employer and a person employed through a contractor." 

Any person who employs, whether directly or through any other person, one or more

employees in a scheduled employment falls within the definition of an “employer”, reads the Judgement.

"A close scrutiny of the definitions of the employer and the employee would bring

the workmen employed through the contractors within the purview of the Act." Stating this, the Court rejected the submission that the contract workmen are not covered under the Act.

The judgement further adds that, "where any of the above categories of workmen
are engaged/ employed through a Contractor, the Occupier/ the Principal Employer shall be personally responsible for ensuring the payment of the minimum rates of wages by the Contractor.

Download Judgement Copy

No Relief on Failure to Appear in Subsequent Recruitments : Supreme Court

A failure to appear in subsequent recruitment drives, may disqualify of any entitlement to relief.

Acting on an appeal preferred by a candidate, the Supreme Court on 29 April 2019, delivered this judgement.
Download Judgement.

Writ Not Maintainable against IBPS or Banks: Supreme Court

In a certain Banking Examination, a candidate failed to produce Community Certificate, issued during a particular period of time. The certificate, so produced by the candidate was prior to those dates and the candidate was disqualified from participating further in the selection process.

The candidate then filed a writ petition challenging the proceeding and the High Court dismissed it. Acting on his appeal, the Supreme Court, on 29 April 2019 delivered its judgement.

The High Court was of the view that the Respondent, IBPS was not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and there was no public function that was discharged by the Respondent. On the said grounds, the High Court opined that the Respondent is not amenable to writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Supreme Court held the High Court was right about holding the Writ Petition not maintainable against the Respondent, on the ground that, conducting recruitment tests for appointment in banking and other financial institutions, was not a public duty. The Respondent is not a creature of a statute, says the judgement, because of the reason that there were no statutory duties or obligations imposed on the Respondent.

The Supreme Court, further held that, "the Respondent therein would not be amenable to Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the activities were voluntarily undertaken by the Respondents and there was no obligation to discharge certain activities which were statutory or of public character."

Reference was made to the Federal Bank
case wherein it was held that "the Writ Petition was not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in spite of the regulatory regime of the Banking Regulation Act and the other statutes being in operation."

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, on further finding that the Respondent had failed to participate in the four rectruitments those were held subsequent to the year 2013,  and "as he did not participate in any of said subsequent recruitments, the Appellant is not entitled to any relief." the Supreme Court, declared.
Download Judgement Copy.

Mere Apprehension cannot be a ground for rejection, says HC

The High Court of Judicature at Madras on 23 April 2019 has permitted the petitioner to conduct cultural programme in the event of Hanumantheertham Village Sri Mariamman Temple Festival at Hanumantheertham post, Uthangarai Taluk, Krishnagir District, on 26.04.2019 between 6.00 p.m. and  10.00 p.m.

The permission is granted with a view that  mere apprehension (of a law and order problem, in the event of the permission being granted) cannot be a ground to reject the representation.

Further to this, the court has  given clear directions as to the conduct of the programme.
No obscene dance or vulgar dialogues
No playing of Double meaning songs
No playing of dance or songs, touching upon any political party or religion or community or caste
No flex boards in support of any political party or communal leader
Not to affect either religious or communal harmony and no discrimination based on caste.
Stick to timings and conditions
"If there is violation of any one of the conditions imposed, the concerned police officer is at liberty to take necessary action, as per law and stop such performance forthwith", the court has warned.

Relief to Computer Assistants is Coming Soon.

The Madurai Bench if Madras High Cour on 24 April 2019, has directed the concerned to allow the petitioners appointed through outsourcing, as per the Government Orders issued periodically, at par with those Computer Assistants, who were recruited under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) through Employment Exchanges to appear for the special qualifying test for absorption as Junior Assistants.

The Order adds that, vide G.O.(Ms)No.84, the Government has ordered that Computer Assistants shall be appointed only through Employment Exchange. Thereafter, vide G.O.(Ms)No.71, dated 20.06.2014, the consolidated pay of Computer Assistants appointed under various  channels for Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Guarantee Scheme was increased from Rs.7,500/~ to Rs 11,000/~ per month.

Further to the above, there is also a mention of "G.O.(Ms)No.37,  Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E5) Department, dated 22.03.2017, of the government's proposal to absorb the Computer Assistants in MGNREG Scheme.

The blogger has been informed of certain computer operators attached tot certain departments of the government with a pay as low as Rs 5500 pm. The blogger hopes there to be some relief to them, as well.

Click Link to Download Order.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ri_1CH2m5oRtCVNlgVztGaiNbTvofspz/view?usp=drivesdk

Is a child, property of a parent?

Is guardianship sufficient to claim suzerainty over the interests of the ward?
Is a child, property of a parent?
Can by the consent of a parent, an act upon a minor, become legal and ethically sound?

The Honourable Justice, at the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, while pronouncing his Order on 22 April 2019, on  a Writ Petition praying to direct the respondents to register the marriage solemnized between a Hindu male and a transwoman, has quoted much in favour of the third gender and has also in his order, published verbatim the response of the  Directorate General of Health Services to Shri Gopi Shankar M, Executive Director, Srishti Madurai Student Volunteer Educational ResearchFoundation, on his request seeking the NHRC to ban the forced sex selective surgeries. The DGMS in it's response sounding of a clear conscience indicating of no violation or any intrusion into Intersex people's fundamental rights, strangely states "any kind of invasive
 medical procedure including sex reassignment surgeries are done only after thorough assessment oft thepatient, obtaining justification for the procedure
planned to be conducted with the help of appropriate diagnostic test and only after taking a written consent of the patient/guardian."

Stating that "The consent of the parent cannot be considered as thec consentof the child." the Justice has quoted the work of Khalil Gibran in his small book, The Prophet.

"Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.
You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts...."

WHO has called for a deferment of intersex genital mutilation (IGM) until the intersex persons are old, enough to make decisions for themselves, the Justice has stated.

The order of the Justice further states that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in NLSA case hasc categoricallystated that none be forced to undergo medical procedures including SRS, sterilisation or hormonal theraphy, as a requirementfor legal recognition of their gender identity.

Taking note of the current state that the mandate issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not beingh onoured, the  Court has to necessarily direct the Government of Tamilnadu to issue a Government Order enshrining the aforesaidm mandateof the Hon'ble Supreme Court so as to effectively ban sex reassignmentsurgeries on intersex infants and children.

"A person who isi n the Third Category is entitled to remain beyond the duality ofm malefemale or opt to identify oneself as male or female. It is entirelythe choice of the individual concerned." the Order states.

Read The Prophet, online
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/58585/58585-h/58585-h.htmhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/58585/58585-h/58585-h.htm
Osho Rajneesh has written a commentary in two volumes, on The Prophet, entitled, The Messiah in two volumes, both available for Free download.
Veteran broadcaster, Late.P.U.Aiyoob, a good old friend of mine, has translated the work in Tamil, entitled, Perarivalan, and this was then made part of all government library collections in the State. The Tiruchirappalli Intellectual Forum had a practice of gifting this book to the visitors.

Pension Order for Postal Employee

The High Court of Judicature at Madras yesterday gave a life_saving verdict to an Extra Departmental Delivery Agent (Gramin Dak Sevak) of the Past, later promoted as a Post man, though releived without pension, for lack of motivation nimum service with the Postal services.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aPgwuVvta0_xtY8jSPj67yJTnQauHmz_/view?usp=drivesdk