A plea of 10 senior engineers of Jet Lite alleging discrimination by the airline in selection of candidates for a training programme of Jet Airways has been dismissed by a Delhi court which said both the airlines are "separate entities" and there is "no contractual obligation" to train them
New Delhi: A plea of 10 senior engineers of Jet Lite alleging discrimination by the airline in selection of candidates for a training programme of Jet Airways has been dismissed by a Delhi court which said both the airlines are "separate entities" and there is "no contractual obligation" to train them.
ADVERTISEMENT
The court, while dismissing the aircraft maintenance engineers' application seeking direction to the airlines to withdraw the list of selected Jet Airways candidates for the training programme, said, "Prima facie there did not exist any contractual obligation of Jet Lite to necessarily train the plaintiffs for maintaining the aircraft acquired by Jet Airways."
The application had contended that the engineers, who were employed by Sahara Airlines, had joined Jet Lite India Ltd and had been seconded to Jet Airways India Ltd with effect from August 19, 2008.
It had also averred that the conditions of employment which were with Sahara Airlines Ltd were retained without much change after Jet Group of Companies had bought its shares.
The senior engineers had alleged discrimination by Jet Lite as their nominations were not considered for training and their junior counterparts in Jet Airways were selected despite it being on seniority basis.
The court noted that, "In the present case, plaintiffs seek interim injunction of staying the operation of the selection list on the basis that the same is the result of discrimination and favoritism of Jet Airways employees."
"However, it is important to note here that even after the secondment, the plaintiffs still remain to be employees of Jet Lite which admittedly is a separate entity than Jet Airways.
"Prima facie, the new aircraft is acquisition of Jet Airways only. It is not the case where there exists any arrangement between the two airlines to share the aircraft and its know how," it said.
The plaintiffs, Prakash Chandra, APS Tomar, Umesh Kumar, R N Kumar, Nitin Kumar Malik, Hardeep Singh, Harpreet Singh, Arunachal Priyadarshi,Naresh Kumar Yadav and Subhashish Parida - all senior aircraft maintenance engineers, had contended that they are senior to some selected candidates and therefore have the right to be selected for training programme for their career growth.
The court, however, dismissed their contentions saying, "Though it is correct that the email seeking nominations for the training was circulated to all the employees including the plaintiffs... Jet Airways cannot be compelled when there does not exist any contractual obligation as there is no contract with Jet Airways."
"Even if nominations were called from the plaintiffs as well, calling the nominations does not give rise to a binding contract," it said.
The respondents- both the airlines- contested the plea saying the plaintiffs are employees of Jet Lite and not of Jet Airways and therefore, they do not have any right to force Jet Airways to train them for the aircraft which has been acquired by Jet Airways for operating only at Delhi and Mumbai Airport.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
