SURYA PRASAD SINGH Vs. LABOUR COURT II KANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was employed as an apprentice with the respondent-corporation. He was on a two years' tenure with effect from 5/11/1981. In March 1982 he was made to work on Tung Machine in 'c' grade job against a clear vacancy which occurred due to the transfer of the incumbent who was working in the said job. The Divisional Manager (Personnel) recommended the case of the appellant for regularisation. The corporation, however, terminated the services of the appellant on 5/11/1983. The dispute was referred for adjudication under the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour court by its award dated 29/11/1990 set aside the order of termination, directed the reinstatement of the appellant to the post of Tung Machine operator with back wages and a further direction that he be made permanent with effect from 17/12/1985. The corporation challenged the award of the Labour court by way of a writ petition before the High court. The High court allowed the writ petition, set aside the award of the Labour court and upheld the termination of the appellant. This appeal by way of special leave is against the judgment of the high court.

(2.) The High court primarily dealt with the question as to whether an apprentice, undergoing training in an industry, was a workman and entitled to the protection of the Act The High court examined the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act) and also the Apprentices Act, 1961 and came to the conclusion that the appellant, having joined the corporation as an apprentice, was not a workman and as such was not entitled to the protection of the Act.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the High court was not justified in going into the question as to whether an apprentice is a workman under the Act or not. We are not inclined to go into the said question and leave the same open to be decided in an appropriate proceeding.