GURU GAUGE Vs. RAGHU S

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-management is said to be engaged in manufacture of pressure gauges and its accessories. That the respondent-workman was working with the petitioner management as a Screen Printer. He was the only workman working as a screen printer. On account of acute recession and for economic and administrative reason, the business of screen printing was discontinued. A notice of retrenchment was issued to the respondent-workman. Retrenchment compensation was also paid and the same was received by the respondent-workman.

(2.) Aggrieved by the retrenchment order, the workman raised a dispute before the Labour Court. By the impugned order dated 09.04.2009, the Labour Court directed the petitioner-management to reinstate the respondent-workman to his original post with continuity of service and consequential benefits along with 50% of backwages, subject to adjustment of retrenchment compensation if any. Questioning the same, the petitioner-management has filed the present petition.

(3.) Smt. Pooja M. Koorse, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the Labour Court exceeded its jurisdiction in passing the order. That the material on record would clearly indicate that the retrenchment is in accordance with law. Therefore, the question of reinstatement would not arise. That even the witnesses have stated that the business of screen printing was closed because of administrative and economic reasons. That retrenchment compensation having been accepted by the workman, the same cannot be challenged thereafter.