Hiring in 2010 may return to pre-recession pace: Manpower

India has once again emerged as the most optimistic nation in terms of hiring plans for the next three months and the recruitment pace is expected to return to the pre-recession level in 2010, said global staffing services firm Manpower.

"There is no more 'cautious optimism' among employers any more; it has given way to 'definite optimism'. Besides, the pace of hiring will be back to the 2007 level in the next year," Manpower India managing director Naresh Malhan said.

According to the Manpower Employment Outlook Survey, India has a net employment outlook— a measure of recruiting plans—of 39% for the first quarter of 2010, the highest among 35 countries surveyed.

India has been reporting the strongest hiring plans globally since the third quarter of 2008. The country’s outlook has improved by 11 percentage points on a quarter-on-quarter basis and by 18% year-on-year, Manpower said.

A sectoral analysis shows that hiring outlook has risen across all sectors. Job seekers in the services, public administration, education, mining and construction, finance, insurance, real estate, and the wholesale & retail trade sectors could look forward to the most favourable hiring environment in early 2010, the survey said.

"The good news is that employer hiring expectations across all industry sectors are improving in the first quarter of 2010, and job seekers in key industry sectors can look forward to the most favourable hiring environment in over a year," Mr Malhan said.

A regional analysis shows that employers in India's four regions expect hiring plans to rise considerably over the next three months both on a quarter-on-quarter and year-on-year basis.

The hiring intentions of employers in the north is the most bullish as 44% said that they would hire in the next three months, followed by the western and eastern regions where employment outlook was 40%. The southern region had the lowest hiring intention of 36%, Manpower said.

Many of the world's labour markets are also showing signs of recovery for the next three months. Employers in 25 of the 35 countries and territories surveyed are reporting positive hiring intentions for the first quarter.

Hiring in the next three months is expected to return to the pre-recession pace throughout much of the Asia-Pacific region, while job prospects are likely to improve in the Americas and in some parts of Europe, the survey said.

In the Asia-Pacific region, hiring plans are strongest in India, Singapore, Taiwan and Australia. Japan reported the weakest and only negative outlook.

The survey said that hiring plans for the first three months of 2010 are also strongest in Brazil, Singapore, Taiwan, Costa Rica, Australia, Peru and Hong Kong, and weakest in Ireland, Romania and Spain.

Though employers in 19 countries and territories reported stronger year-on-year outlooks, employers in Belgium, the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania reported their weakest hiring plans to date, the report added.


No loss to govt, RIL if gas is supplied at $2.34/mmBtu: RNRL

RNRL, the Anil Ambani group company, in an affidavit before the apex court has said that there would be no impact on the government at all and it would suffer no loss whatsoever and RIL would also make a profit of Rs30,000 crore at $2.34 per mmBtu

Anil Ambani-led Reliance Natural Resources Ltd (RNRL) on Tuesday contended before the Supreme Court that it has an “unqualified” right to get gas at $2.34 per unit for 17 years from Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) which will, along with the government, not suffer any loss at this rate, reports PTI.

"There would be no impact on the government at all and it would suffer no loss whatsoever. RIL would also make a profit of Rs30,000 crore at this rate," RNRL said in an affidavit before a Bench headed by chief justice KG Balakrishnan.

"In case the government values the gas at $4.20 per mmBtu and RIL sells gas to RNRL at the price of $2.34 per mmBtu, the Government would still obtain its full share of the profit on gas," it said.

"RNRL submits that it has an unqualified right to get 28 MMSCMD for 17 years at the price of $2.34 per mmBtu," the company argued.

It pleaded that RIL is trying to inflate its profits by saying that the gas can only be sold at $4.20 per unit.

"The submission of RIL that the gas can only be sold at $4.20 per unit is only an attempt to inflate its profits. The government would obtain no additional benefit from such pricing and the net effect would only be enrichment of RIL," the company said in its four-page affidavit.

Raising objections on the government's stand that the arrangement for the supply and pricing of gas for NTPC cannot be equated with a private agreement between RIL and RNRL, the Anil Ambani group has accused the Centre of deliberately causing "confusion" and hurting the interests of State-run power utility NTPC Ltd.

The government had in its affidavit filed before the apex court on 2nd December argued that a private accord between RIL and RNRL could not be equated with that of any arrangement for NTPC.

The Ambani brothers are engaged in a bitter court battle over the supply and price of the gas from KG Basin. While RNRL is seeking gas at a committed price of $2.34 per unit, RIL says it cannot honour the commitment made in the 2005 family agreement due to government's pricing and gas policy.


Text of the opinion of Justice JS Verma, Former Chief Justice of India



A central requirement for upholding the rule of law is that there should not be any executive interference in the independence and integrity of the judicial process.

The rapid expansion of the power and jurisdiction of quasi judicial bodies raises new challenges in this regard. Great caution is called for on the part of the Government, the judiciary and society to ensure that the independence of quasi judicial bodies is fully protected and that executive power is not misused to interfere with their decision making, their independence and their integrity. It is essential to ensure that quasi judicial orders should not be subject to review or interference by executive authorities that have neither the power nor the requisite expertise to review, alter or nullify quasi judicial orders. Quasi judicial orders should be subject to review only by lawfully authorised tribunals or by courts, based on well established principles of law.
The recent decision SEBI board to review and declare as "non-est" two quasi judicial orders of SEBI violates established legal and Constitutional principles. These quasi judicial orders may be reviewed only by a judicial forum with requisite jurisdication, at the instance of a petitioner with standing to seek relief.
The decision to declare these quasi judicial order as void is meaningless in any absolute sense. Its meaning is relative, depending upon the courts' willingness to grant relief in any particular situation. Even if a decision is 'void' or a 'nullity', it remains in being unless and until some steps are taken before courts to have it declared void.
Lord Radcliff said in Smith v/s East Ellse, 1956 A.C. 736 at 769
"An order, even if not made in good faith, is still an act capable of legal consequences. It bears no brand of invalidity upon its forehead. Unless the necessary proceedings are taken at law to establish the cause of invalidity and to get it quashed or otherwise upset.
It will remain as effective for its ostensible purpose as the most impeccable of orders".
The necessity of recourse to the court has been pointed out repeatedly in the House of Lords and Privy Council, without distinction between latent and patent defects. Supreme Court of India has taken the same view.
The order would be presumed to be valid unless the presumption was rebutted in competent legal proceedings by a party entitled to sue.
The court will invalidate an order only if the right remedy is sought by the right person in the right proceedings and circumstances. The order may be hypothetically a nullity, but the court may refuse to quash it because of the plaintiff's lack of standing, … or for some other legal reason. In any such case, the 'void' order remains effective and is, in reality, valid. (see pg. 341-344, Administrative Law, 7th Edn., by Wade and cases in footnote).
All official decisions are presumed to be valid until set aside or otherwise held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction ( de Smith, 5th Edn.- See Chapter 5-048 at pg. 259-260 and cases in footnotes 17&18).

December 5 2009                                                                    Justice J S Verma


We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.

To continue

Sign Up or Sign In


To continue

Sign Up or Sign In



The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)