PAM NETWORK LTD Vs. B BALAKRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of the Labour Court on application No. 24/02 under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1949 (for short the Act') is called in question in this writ petition.

(2.) The records reveal that the respondent was appointed on 24.08.2000 as Business Development Manager, by the petitioner -Company as per the terms and conditions contained in the order of appointment - Annexure Ex. A.1. The petitioner - Company agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 32,500/- per month as salary to the respondent. However, the salary for the months from April 2001 to November 2001 was not paid to the respondent by the petitioner - company and consequently the company was due totally in a sum of Rs. 2,23,522/-to the respondent towards arrears of wages. Hence the respondent moved an application under Section 33(c)(2) of the Act before the Labour Court.

(3.) The management of the petitioner - Company filed statement of objections before the Labour Court inter alia contending that the respondent is not entitled to get any salary from April 2001 to November 2001 since he was not working during that period in the company and has not achieved the performance standard as agreed upon. It is further contended that as the respondent was performing the managerial functions, he is not a workman as defined under Section 2(s) of the Act.