MANAGEMENT OF INDIAN COMPRESSOR MAKERS CORPORATION NEW DELHI Vs. D D GOPTA PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT DELHI AND TWO ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution against respondent No. 2 who was admittedly a workman; he was working as a turner in the electric motor department of the petitioner which was claimed to have been closed down, it being averred that the respondent No. 2 along with three others was working in the department which was closed down. The greater part of the award of the Labour Court (Shri D. D. Gupta) was concerned with the question of closure; there is very little discussion on the other question, which alone has been argued before me by Dr. Anand Prakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner, concerning whether the workman had been paid retrenchment compensation as per section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which will be hereinafter called the Act.

(2.) It is needless to be concerned about the other three workers who were employed in this department; reportedly the matter has been settled with them. Retrenchment compensation had also, by way of abundant caution, been paid to all (four) of them within the meaning of the said provision despite the stand taken by the manage- ment that there was a closure of that department.

(3.) It would seem best to set out here, in the very language of the Labour Court the findings in so far as the question of the retrenchment compensation is concerned; Dr. Anand Prakash stated that it was needless for him to rest his case on closure since section 25-F of the Act has been complied with in this case :