Victory for JNU security guards as Tribunal grants interim relief from termination
Prameela K
10 March 2022

Jawaharlal Nehru University has been restrained by the Labour Court from terminating the workmen's services during the pendency of the proceedings.
———-
ON Thursday, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal [CGIT]-cum-Labour Court in New Delhi granted interim protection from termination to ten security guards of the Jawaharlal Nehru University [JNU].
The order was passed after the applicants' advocates Kanwalpreet Kaur and Surya Prakash argued that their termination would contravene Section 33(1) of the Industrial Disputes [ID] Act, 1947. Section 33(1) bars an employer from changing the terms of service of its workmen (to their prejudice) or terminating the workmen's services during the pendency of any proceedings, including conciliation proceedings.
In the present case, the JNU administration reportedly laid off close to 500 security personnel from September 2019 onwards. Advocate Surya Prakash informed The Leaflet that "500 workers were removed from JNU in September 2019, but these ten guards were adamant and we all tried to support them to fight." Highlighting how the tribunal's order "gives an important message after their struggle for three years", Prakash said that the other 490 workers also had a matter pending in court, pertaining to arrears worth 80 crore rupees. The workers argue that no notice pay or retrenchment compensation has been given so far to those terminated.
The applicant guards, who had been working on the campus ranging from periods of eight to 12 years, were informed that their services would be terminated on September 18, 2019. Following this, they immediately approached the Delhi High Court, which passed orders restricting the respondent (JNU) from terminating their services. The guards had been contracted under two companies, namely the multinational G4S Secure Solutions (India) Private Limited and SIS Limited, but despite change in contractors, the absolute control over their work remained with the university administration, and their lawyers argued that JNU remains their 'principal employer'.