NEHRU YUVA KENDRA SANGATHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan (NYKS, for short), registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. This petition is directed against Award dated 2.3.98 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal, New Delhi in I.D. No. 26/1992. The main question to be decided is as to whether Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan is an "Industry" within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The factual background which has led to the aforesaid issue may be narrated first:

(2.) Shri Murari Lal Sharma, respondent No. 4 worked with the petitioner as Peon from 28.8.80 to 5.2.87 and as Peon-cum-Watch and Ward from 6.2.87 till March, 1988. While working in the aforesaid capacity he applied for the post of Accounts Clerk with the petitioner and was duly selected. Accordingly, he was appointed as Accounts Clerk w.e.f. 4.4.88 and he worked as Accounts Clerk till 30.11.88 when his services were terminated. He raised Industrial Disputes challenging his termination which was referred to Central Government Industrial Tribunal (for short "CGIT") with the following terms of reference:

(3.) On receipt of reference, notices were issued to both the parties. Workman filed his statement of claim in which he mentioned having worked in aforesaid capacities and submitted that his services Were illegally terminated w.e.f. 1.12.98 inviolation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as he was not paid retrenchment compensation and one month notice or pay in lieu thereof. In the written statement filed by the petitioner it was stated that workman worked from 28.11.80 to 31.7.86asPeon-cum-Watch and Ward at Nehru Yuva Kendra, Mathura (U.P.) where he abandoned his job and disappeared. He again applied for Peon- cum-Watch & Ward at Nehru Yuva Kendra, Agra on 28.1.1987 in response to an advertisement in the Daily Amar Ujala. He was selected asPeon-cum-Watch & Ward and joined service on 9.2.1987. Later on he applied for the post of Accounts Clerk at Nehru Yuva Kendra-Agra and pursuant to his application dated 21.3.1988 to this effect was offered appointment for the post of Accounts Clerk purely on ad hoc basis at a monthly consolidated remuneration of Rs. 800.00 per month vide appointment letter dated 30.3.88 wherein it was-specifically mentioned that petitioner could terminate his services without serving any notice and also without assigning any reason whatsoever during the period of ad hoc appointment. He joined Nehru Yuva Kendra-Agra on 4.4.1988 and worked upto 30.11.1988. Petitioner did not deny that workman's services were terminated w.e.f. 1.12.1988 and that no retrenchment compensation and one month notice in lieu thereof is given to the workman at the time of his termination. However, it was pleaded that petitioner being not an "Industry" provisions of Disputes Act, 1947 were not applicable. Evidence was recorded and arguments were heard by CGIT which led to passing of the impugned Award dated 2.3.1988. CGIT held petitioner to be an "Industry" and thus provisions of Industrial Disputes Act applicable to it. On merits, it was held that since workman had worked for over 240 days during preceding 12 consecutive months, counting backwards from 30.11.1988 to 4.4.1988 his termination was bad, as provisions of Section 25F of the I.D. Act were not complied with. The plea of the petitioner is that termination of services of the workman was actuated by his mis-behaviour with the superiors or that his work was not satisfactory, was not accepted as no disciplinary action has been taken against him. Accordingly, it was held that workman is entitled to reinstatement with full back wages and all other benefits which would have accrued. In the present writ petition petitioner has assailed the Award of the CGIT on both counts, namely., against the decision of the CGIT holding the petitioner as "Industry" and also holding termination of workman's services as illegal and relief of reinstatement with back wages given to him by CGIT. I will deal with both the aspects in the same order: