KHEMCHAND Vs. PARVEEN STEELS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition for setting aside the impugned Award dated 15.7.2014 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court in LCA No.31/2011 titled Khem Chand v. M/s Parveen Steels.

(2.) The brief facts of the case, as stated in the Award dated 15.7.2014, are that the petitioner joined the Management as Munim in the year 1996 at last drawn monthly salary of Rs.8,000/- and at the time of joining, he was asked by the Management to deposit Rs.1,50,000/-, out of the amount he got after retirement from BSF as security in lieu of which he was assured to be given job along with a dividend of 20% which he did. During his services, the Management deducted Rs.5,000/- from his salary with assurance that total deposit amount will be released to him but in December 2008 and when he demanded for his deposit money, his services were terminated on 15.1.2010. The Management did not pay his deposited amount despite his repeated visits till 15.10.2010 and he was also extended threats.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Labour Court erred in holding that there existed no relationship of employer and employee between the petitioner and the Management; that there was no prior adjudication upon the amount claimed; that the present claim not only includes the non-paid salary and other dues, which could not be proved by the Petitioner, but also the loan amount. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the reply dated 18.12.2008, wherein, it is urged that the respondent has admitted that the benefit as well as right accrued in favour of the petitioner to file a petition under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon the impugned Award and has submitted that the claim of the petitioner under Section 33(c)(2) was not maintainable as there was neither any relationship of employer and employee nor was anything due or acknowledged to be due by the respondent.