People's Democracy

TAMIL NADU

State Terrorism Against Striking Employees

W R Varada Rajan

THE indefinite strike by over 13 lakh employees of the state government and teachers, which commenced on July 2, 2003, witnessed the unprecedented terror and scores of vindictive actions unleashed by the authoritarian AIADMK regime in the state. The strike by the employees and teachers was against the state government’s retrograde move of downsizing and also against the drastic curtailment of pension and other benefits.

The Tamil Nadu government had armed itself with an unlawful law – the Tamil Nadu Essential Services Maintenance Act (TESMA) 2002 – which is a very draconian law. For the first time since the Act was enacted, the government invoked its stringent provisions and detained the leaders of the JACTTEO-GEO and COTA-GEO, two federations of staff and teachers’ unions, at midnight on June 30, 2003. This was a preemptive move to prevent the indefinite strike called for from July 2. The government threatened that the union functionaries arrested for inciting the strike would be soon suspended from service and if convicted under the TESMA, which provides for a maximum of three-year imprisonment or Rs 5000 fine, or both, would be dismissed.

But, the employees of the Tamil Nadu secretariat, under the very nose of the chief minister, J Jayalalitha, bravely responded by commencing the indefinite strike a day in advance. The functionaries of the federation of JACTTEO-GEO and COTA-GEO, condemned the arrests and said it would not help to end the impasse and would only prompt them to protest with increased vigour. The indefinite strike, totally crippled the normal functioning of the secretariat at Chennai and government offices, schools, colleges and universities throughout Tamil Nadu. The administration reeled under a state of utter paralysis.

The actions embarked upon by the state government was so reprehensible that it provoked a senior judge of the High Court to comment that such “imprudent” behaviour would lower the state’s image. He even directed: “You should stop midnight arrests, videographing and conducting searches at their (employees’) houses. If they are at fault, proceed against them departmentally”.

DRACONIAN

ORDINANCE 

The government had by then come up with an ordinance giving itself the summary power of dismissal en masse, without any application of mind and without giving the employees an opportunity to be heard. The ordinance, which amended TESMA (Section 7), provides for treating any absence from workplace after the promulgation of the ordinance as “deemed participation” in the banned strike irrespective of the actual reason for such absence. The ordinance was given retrospective effect from April 23. The key features of the ordinance amending the Tamil Nadu Essential Services Maintenance Act, 2002, are draconian to say the least. The explanatory statement on the ordinance said that apart from the possible prosecution under Section 4, the government “thought it fit” that at present further powers were needed to deal with such defiant persons in a manner effectively affecting their service conditions.

The newly-incorporated Section 7 (1) of the ESMA states: “... if any notification under Section 3 of the Act has been published by the government in the official gazette expressing its intention to prohibit strikes in respect of the service defined under Section 2 of the Act, any government servant to whom the Act applies shall at once report to duty where he\she was reporting prior to the strike prohibited by the notification. In case of failing to do so, the said government servant is deemed to have admitted having committed the misconduct knowingly and voluntarily warranting the punishment.” And, the penalty for the “misconduct” could be “dismissal from service, or in the alternative, a break in service, as the case may be, without conducting any enquiry.” 

The ordinance added an explanation, which said: “It will not be obligatory on the part of the appointing authority or the government as the case may be to individually serve the order of dismissal or the order of break in service or any other punishment on the employees by issuance of separate order and it will be sufficient if the said order is published in the notice board of the office where he\she was working, or if a newspaper publication is made either en masse or individually stating the decision made in terms of sub-section (2) in respect of the said employee”. 

The right of the government servant against whom an order of dismissal or any other punishment has been passed, was restricted to just approach the Appointing Authority and “prove that his\her non-reporting to duty was not due to his\her participation in the strike but due to bona-fide reasons other than participation in the strike”. 

COURT 
INTERVENTION 
The government did not pay heed to the sane advice of the High Court. It continued with its spree of repressive measures. Midnight arrests of employees and their leaders continued, crossing the figure of 2200. Summary dismissal, without even giving individual notices, of around 2 lakh employees, was resorted to in a brazen display of authoritarianism. The government was intent upon crushing the strike by any means. 
The government also asked heads of departments and Collectors to “freeze the attendance registers” as on July 3 and not to allow those who turned up for duty after that day to sign attendance.

The single judge of the High Court, who continued the enquiry at his residence even during the weekend holidays entertained petitions challenging the ordinance and consequent arrests and dismissals. The court passed orders advising the employees to return to work and the government to release employees and withdraw dismissal orders.

But, the Jayalalitha government bent on arm-twisting its own employees decided to challenge the order of the single judge and went on appeal before the Principal Bench of the same High Court. The Bench, presided by the chief justice himself, held a protracted hearing in the case as more parties came up with further petitions. The judgement, delivered on July 11, upheld the plea of the state government on jurisdictional grounds. It came as a rude shock and caused deep disappointment not only among the employees but also among the people in general. The Court’s order to release arrested employees on bail was nothing more than a relief that could be granted by any judicial magistrate. The judgement has not addressed even the issues raised by the judges themselves in the course of the hearing. It chose not to delve on the government-unleashed terrorism on its employees, by throwing to the winds the Constitutional mandates of democracy, fair play and justice. It only relegated the employees to the statutory remedy under the Administration Tribunal Act. 

Even The Hindu editorially commented that the ‘substance of the ruling in this landmark case amounts to denial of justice’. It described the AIADMK government’s actions as “an extraordinary case of deployment of State power against its own employees” and “summary dismissal and the overnight arrest of hundreds of thousands of employees … are in profound conflict with fundamental rights, the basic norms of democracy, and enlightened self-interest”. 

ALL ROUND 
PROTEST 
The authoritarian handling of the strike by Tamil Nadu government evoked all round protest in Tamil Nadu and throughout the country. All trade unions staged protest actions, courting arrest throughout the state. The All India State Government Employees Federation (AISGEF) called for solidarity actions in all the states. The central trade unions also condemned the repressive actions and joined the protest. 

All the opposition political parties in the state demanded the Jayalalitha government to end the repression and resolve the issues through negotiations. The solitary exception was, of course, the BJP. The BJP state president, C P Radhakrishnan met the chief minister, Jayalalithaa, and hailed her government for acceding to “major demands” of the unions. He wanted the unions not to go ahead with their strike plan in the interests of the public and the state. Later, even as the government was going ahead with its arrests, dismissal, eviction of employees from their quarters and the like, he came out with a statement accusing the CPI(M) and other opposition parties of inciting the strike ‘for political ends’. 

EVEN AFTER 
THE STRIKE… 
The federation of JACTTEO-GEO and COTA-GEO, under the changed circumstances after the High Court judgement, decided to end the strike after eleven days. It appealed to the chief minister to restore the status quo prior to July 1 to usher in an atmosphere which is conducive for cordial discussions to resolve the issues. But, the appeal fell on deaf ears. The refusal of the Tamil Nadu government to permit the employees to report back to work and the arrogant attitude towards the plea for restoration of normalcy by engaging the unions in talks, all smack of a high and mighty stance. 

The arrogance and highhandedness of the Jayalalitha government of Tamil Nadu, as reflected in its vindictive designs against the striking employees and teachers, bear an ominous portent not only for the trade union and labour rights but also for the democratic rights and institutions as well. The democratic forces and the trade union movement in the country cannot remain a mute spectator to such an onslaught by a state government against its own employees. 
Even at this stage, the Tamil Nadu government will be better advised to roll back its vindictive measures and initiate the process of dialogue to find an amicable solution to the issues at large. 
The unprecedented situation in Tamil Nadu mandates all sections of the workers and democratic forces to stand firmly in solidarity with the struggling employees and teachers and unitedly resist the authoritarian assaults on their fundamental rights and defeat the ESMA and the related ordinance in Tamil Nadu.