This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioners representation dated 29.8.2007 submitted to include their names in the scheme to be framed to absorb in the respective posts as per the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 10.07.2007 passed in W.P.Nos.4793 of 2000, 4245, 19787 of 2003, 5987, 8881, 8897, 8903, 9234, 9256, 9288, 9289, 9698, 10446, 11368, 14035, 18408 of 2004, and W.A.Nos.399 to 421 of 2007.
2. The present writ petition was admitted on 1.11.2007. Thereafter, on the petition M.P.No.1 of 2008 filed by the writ petitioners, the writ petition was directed to be posted for final hearing during the first week of December, 2008. The matter was listed on 27.11.2009. Respondents' counsel took time. The case was once again listed on 10.12.2009. On 10.12.2009, there was no representation for the petitioners. Today the date fixed matter is listed for hearing. None appear for the petitioners. Considering the nature of the relief sought for and the facts as stated by counsel for respondents, the writ petition is taken up for disposal on merits.
3. The petitioners numbering 26 are employees of the first respondent management working in the International Airport in the Flight Handling Unit and Catering Department. Earlier, a large number of similarly placed employees filed a batch of writ petitions, viz., W.P.No.15915 of 1999 etc., for a mandamus to direct the respondents management not to indulge in the practice of employing persons such as the petitioners only for a period of 90 days and ousting them thereafter and to frame a scheme for absorption of the workmen to the regular post and for other benefits. The writ petitions were dismissed by a common order dated 31.8.2000. The employees took up the matter in appeal, viz., W.A.Nos.399 to 421 of 2001 etc., which were disposed off by a common judgment dated 10.7.2007. The Division Bench of this Court considering the nature of relief sought for and the decision of the Apex Court, directed the respondents to frame a scheme. Para 34 of the Division Bench judgment of this court is as follows:-
"34. As in the above case, in the case on hand also, the petitioners have sought a direction to the respondent-Management to frame a Scheme. As has been held by the Apex Court in the above judgment, since such formula was accepted by the Apex Court, to absorb such employees under a Scheme in a phased manner, we feel it appropriate, following the above judgment of the Apex Court, to allow the prayer of the petitioners, by directing the respondent-Management to frame a Scheme."
4. Against the said order, the management has filed appeals to the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.24630 to 24672 of 2007 batch. The Special Leave to Appeals were listed for hearing on 23.11.2007. The delay was condoned. The employees respondents therein were given three weeks time to file counter-affidavit and the counsel appearing for the employees undertook before the Apex Court that they will not file any contempt petition to implement the Division Bench Order till final disposal of the Special Leave to Appeals. Therefore, no interim order was passed.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents herein, the appellants before the Apex Court stated that status quo is being maintained in the matter.
6. Counsel for respondents submitted that the present writ petition is filed by the petitioners to include their names in the scheme to be framed in terms of the order of the Division Bench of this Court cited above. In view of the appeals pending before the Apex Court, she requested that appropriate orders may be passed to safeguard both parties pending a final decision by the Apex Court.
7. In this case, the Division Bench of this Court has ordered the framing of a scheme and further adjudication is before the Apex Court with regard to the relief sought for by the employees in the earlier round of litigation. Unless the issue is decided by the Apex Court on merits, the relief sought for in the present writ petition cannot be considered. The representation dated 29.8.2007 can be considered by the respondents, the appellants before the Apex Court, only after the issue is finally resolved before the Apex Court.
8. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to pursue their plea on merits after the Apex Court decides the issue in Special Leave to Appeal Nos.24630 to 24672 of 2007 batch. No costs.
ts To
1.Chairman & Managing Director, The Management of Air India Ltd., "Hansalaya Building" V Floor, No.15, Baracamba Road, New Delhi 110 001.
2.The Regional Manager, Air India Ltd., Marshalls Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.
3.The Deputy Manager (Airport), Air India Ltd., Anna International Airport, Meenambakkam, Chennai 600 027