KRISHNANKUTTY Vs. GENERAL MANAGER KSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners were functioning as Reserve Drivers recruited through the Employment Exchange under the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. They were originally appointed for a period of 89 days, then immediately re-appointed with the break of a day for a period of one or two similar terms. Their services terminated on different dates during the period from June 1980 to December 1980

(2.) Petitioners contend that such termination is retrenchment in accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called 'the Act'. Therefore, such retrenchment retaining their juniors in the same category are illegal and ab initio void. Therefore it is contended that the petitioners are entitled to be declared as continuing in service without any break and entitled for reinstatement with back wages.

(3.) According to them, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation is a 'State' coming under Art.12 of the Constitution of India. It is also an Industry falling within the definition of S.2(j) of the Act. The petitioners are workmen under S.2(s) of the Act. It is contended that their services cannot be terminated in violation of the provisions of Chapter VA of the Act. The provisions of that Chapter shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law or contract as laid down in S.25(j) of the Act. The termination, as earlier pointed out, the petitioners would contend, was retrenchment as defined under S.2(oo) of the Act. When the services of the petitioners were terminated, persons recruited as Reserve Drivers through the Employment Exchange subsequent to the petitioners' recruitment, who were juniors to the petitioners, were continuing in service. The termination of the petitioners' services retaining their juniors would render the termination illegal and void since it violates the mandatory provisions contained in S.25G of the Act.