OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION v. KRISHAN GOPAL & Ors.

From the Judgment and Order dated 12.10.2015 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in L.P.A. No. 654 of 2010. With Civil Appeal Nos. 935-937, 938-939, 934, 669-696 of 2020. P.S. Narasimha, ASG, J.P. Cama, S. Guru Krishna Kumar, Ajit Kumar Sinha, P.S. Patwalia, Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Nina Gupta, Ms. Palak Chadha, Ms. Ruchika Joshi, Ms. Suruchi Kumar, Mudit Sharma, V.N. Subramaniam, Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, Rajesh B., Ms. Shruta Gopalan, Arindam, Ms. Madhusmita Bora, V.N. Koura, Ms. Aruna Mathur, Shirish Kumar, Ms. Paramjeet Benipal, Anupam Roy, Ms. Anuradha Arputham A B C D E F G H 664 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 3 S.C.R. A B C D E F G H (for M/S. Arputham Aruna and Co), Abhishek Puri, V. Siddharth, Manan Gambhir, P. N. Puri, Ms. Asha Jain Madan, Mukesh Jain, Ms. Madhu Talwar, Pranay Ranjan, Ms. Alka Aggarwal, Rajan Kumar Chaurasia, R.R. Rajesh, Raj Bahadur, Lalit Sankhla, D. Mahesh Babu, Ms. Suchitra Hrangkhawl, Ganesan Subbian, Katubadi Ismail, P. Prabhakar, D. Srinivas, Venkateswara Rao Anumolu, Santosh Krishnan, Ankur Yadav, P. Venkat Reddy, Prashant Tyagi, P. Srinivas Reddy, Advs. for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. This batch of appeals arises from the judgments of the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Madras and Uttarakhand. A judgment of a two judge Bench of this Court in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited v Petroleum Coal Labour Union1 (“PCLU”) has assumed focus since the decisions of the High Courts in four of the present appeals have relied on the judgment of this Court in coming to the conclusion that the workmen were entitled to regularisation in service. In one of the five appeals, however where the prayer for regularisation was rejected, the decision in PCLU has been distinguished. Hence on either end of the spectrum, the judgment in PCLU has a significant bearing on the outcome of the appeals.

#2. The manner in which the present appeals arise is indicated, for convenience of reference, in the following tabulation: Sl. Nos. Particulars Remarks

#1. Civil Appeals @ SLP (C) Nos. 15971-15998/2018 ONGC & Ors. v. ONGC Field Operators Union& Ors. The appeals arise out of a judgment dated 5 January 2018 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 24 Writ Appeals and 4 Writ Petitions. The High Court directed regularisation of 450 workmen who moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution without seeking a reference before the Industrial Tribunal under the In dustrial Disputes Act 194 7 2. The judgment of the High Court has relied upon the decision of this Court in PCLU (supra). 1 (2015) 6 SCC 494 2 “ID Act” OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION v. KRISHAN GOPAL [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J.] 665

#5. Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 4/2016 Renumbered as C.A.1878/2016 ONGC v. Krishan Gopal & Ors. Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 10478/2016 M Rajan & Ors. v. ONGC & Ors. Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 30854/2017 ONGC v. Tel AVM Prakartik Gas Karmchari Sangh Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. The Management of ONGC v. Petroleum Employees Union The appeal arises out of a judgment dated 12 December 2015 of the High Court of Delhi. Allowing a Letters Patent Appeal, the High Court directed regularisation of 24 workmen who had instituted proceedings under Article 226 without seeking a reference to the Industrial Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The High Court relied upon the decision of this Court in PCLU (supra). The appeal arises from a judgment of the Madras High Court dated 20 November 2015 in Writ Appeals. The High Court rejected the prayer for regularisation made by the workmen who had instituted proceedings under Article 226. The High Court held that the remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 could not be bypassed. The High Court distinguished the decision of this Court in PCLU (supra). The appeal arises from a decision of the High Court of Uttarakhand dated 3 August 2017 in writ proceedings under Article 226, as a consequence of which, nine workmen have been directed to be regularised. The High Court set aside the award of the Industrial Tribunal which had held in favour of ONGC, the employer. The High Court relied on the decisions of this Court in PCLU and in State of Haryana v Piara Singh3 (“Piara Singh”). (The decision in Piara Singh has been overruled by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka v Umadevi4). The appeal arises from the judgment of the Madras High Court dated 29 January 2018 by which the services of fourteen messengers and three sanitary cleaners have been regularised by the High Court. The award of the Industrial Tribunal has been set aside. The High Court has relied on the judgment of this Court in PCLU (supra).