Chapter: 2.4.10 Badli in the M.R.T.U.P.U.L.P.

Badli

Employing a person as badli for years together

• In the case,

Sangli Municipal Council
V
Dharamshingh Nagarkar
1991 II CLR 4 (Bom. HC).

• the Unfair Labour Practice being under item 6 of the Sch. IV of MRTU and PULP Act, 1971,in this case', the workman was kept as temporary for a period of 15 months.
• The point was whether it was legal and' proper? It merely meant that he should not have been kept as a temporary for a long time.
• What would be a long time depends upon facts and circumstances of each and every case.
• In the present case, the workman was employed every month.
• That itself shows that the Petitioner Council had no intention to make him a permanent employee ...was indulging in an act of hire and fire.
• The High Court observed that, 'the contention was that the period of 15 months would not be a period of 'for years' to extract item 6 of Sch. IV.
• This contention is not accepted and it is observed as follows:
• When it is said that one should not keep a workman as temporary for years, it means that he should not be kept as temporary for a long time.
• What would be a long time depends upon facts and circumstances of each and every case.
• In a given case even a period of less than five years and more vouid not be considered as 'for years’ and in a given a case a period of more than two years as in the present case would be a long period.
• It is pertinent that, in the case, the workman was employed every month.
• That itself shows that the petitioner council had no intention to make him a permanent employee and was indulging in an act of hire and fire.'