Solapur Municipal Corporation vs. Majarewadi Gram Panchayat Employees

The Supreme Court of India has issued a significant judgment in the case of Solapur Municipal Corporation vs. Majarewadi Gram Panchayat Employees. The matter revolves around the employment status of the respondents who claim to be regular employees of the gram panchayat. This case involves complex legal implications regarding the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. The Supreme Court has remanded the case to the High Court for further consideration, stressing the importance of analyzing all relevant documentary evidence. Read on to understand the intricacies of this legal dispute and its impact on employee rights.

Facts

• The Division Bench disposed of three writ petitions by directing that services rendered by the writ petitioners before 05.05.1992 with the gram panchayat shall be treated as regular service to the Corporation.
• Services rendered from 05.05.1992 till 01.02.2003 were also deemed as regular service to the Corporation.
• All service benefits and retirement benefits were to be extended to them based on the services rendered from their respective dates of appointment by the gram panchayat till 01.02.2003.
• The Corporation’s review petitions were dismissed by the Division Bench on 08.08.2014.
• Solapur Municipal Corporation filed six appeals against the judgment dated 31.07.2013 which was in favor of the writ petitioners.
• Another Division Bench followed the same judgment and allowed W.P. No 2463 of 2010 filed by another similarly situated employee on 09.03.2017.
• The Bench found no error apparent on the face of the record, warranting the review of its judgment, and dismissed the review petitions.
• Solapur Municipal Corporation filed Civil Appeal No 9133 of 2018 against the order
• The order passed in the fourth writ petition was similar to the earlier judgment
• The operation of the judgment dated 31.07.2013 was stayed by the Court till the next date of hearing on 24.04.2015
• The interim order was made absolute on 24.08.2018 while granting leave
• The issue for consideration was the status of the petitioners who were engaged in the service of Majarewadi Gram Panchayat
• The respondents claimed to be absorbed in the service of the Corporation from 05.05.1992
• The Corporation contended that they were continued on a daily wage basis till 01.02.2003
• The Division Bench relied on an affidavit from the Urban Development Department confirming the regularization of 300 posts for employees of merged gram panchayats

Also Read: Vaishali Wadhwani and Mamta Mishra vs. MPPSC: Upholding Justice and Integrity in Recruitment Processes

Issue

• The main issue for consideration is the employment status of the employees in the service of Majarewadi Gram Panchayat.
• The respondents claim to be regular employees of the gram panchayat as on 05.05.1992.
• They may be entitled to claim benefits under Section 493 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949.
• Section 493 refers to the transitory provisions in Appendix IV, which applies to the constitution of the Corporation and other specified matters.
• Clause 5 in Appendix IV deals with the continuation of appointments, taxes, budget estimates, assessments, etc.
• Sub-clause (a) of Clause 5 mentions appointments made under the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965, or any other law.

Also Read: Jagdishchandra v. Joint Charity Commissioner & Ors.

Analysis

• Officers and servants in the employ of the municipality or local authority before the appointed day become employees of the Corporation.
• They will continue to receive salaries, allowances, and conditions of service as per their entitlement on the appointed day.
• Service rendered before the appointed day by the officers and servants will be considered as service rendered for the Corporation.
• Any existing law in force in a local area designated as a city before the appointed day will continue until superseded by appointments made under the Act or another law.
• Resolution No.83(8) dated 20.03.1992 by Majarewadi Gram Panchayat made 48 permanent appointments of employees till 31.03.1992.
• Resolution No.83(9) specified that 48 temporary appointments would be effective from 01.04.1992.
• Government approved 300 posts on 25.03.2003 and clarified no arrears would be given for service before 01.02.2003.
• The bone of contention is whether the employees were daily wage workers or regular employees of the gram panchayat.
• High Court did not consider the documents earlier presented before this Court for the first time.
• Status of the employees would have to be determined based on merits at the final hearing of the writ petition.
• 48 appointees from the gram panchayat were not entitled to claim benefits of Resolution No.83(8).
• Corporation questions the authenticity of some regular appointments and doubts the legitimacy of the gram panchayat’s actions.
• Employment status of employees in Majarewadi Gram Panchayat is crucial in the legal context.
• Original orders of appointment in Marathi with English translations from the gram panchayat were produced, all dated 20.03.1992.
• Ordinarily, documentary evidence should not be produced belatedly in the last stage.
• New documents were brought forward, impacting the rights of several workmen.
• The new documents need minute verification and examination.
• Possibility of further documentary evidence being led in relation to the new documents.
• Reconsideration of the matter by the High Court of Maharashtra at Bombay is deemed appropriate.
• The High Court is better suited to undertake the task of reviewing the case in light of the new documents.

Also Read: Legal Analysis: K.B. Lal vs. Gyanendra Pratap & Ors. – Condonation of Delay in Civil Appeal

Decision

• The matter is left open for adjudication afresh by the High Court.
• Both parties may bring on record necessary documentary evidence for reconsideration.
• The High Court is requested to prioritize and dispose of the case expeditiously due to its antiquity.
• The appeals are allowed, setting aside previous judgments and orders.
• The case is remanded to the High Court for reconsideration.
• Parties to bear their own costs.
• Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
• Writ petitions are restored to the file of the High Court.

Case Title: SOLAPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Vs. SHANKARRAO GOVINDRAO PATIL (2024 INSC 423)

Case Number: C.A. No.-009127-009132 – 2018

Click here to read/download original judgement