GLAXO LABORATORIES INDIA LTD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a manufacturer and distributor of drugs, Pharmaceuticals, food products and laboratory chemicals. Medical representatives are employed by the petitioner for the purpose of canvassing sale of products. One T.L. Kuriakose was a medical representative of the petitioner company. Being a medical representative he was required to call on doctors, hospitals, stockists, chemists and druggist and to take efforts to canvass, promote and push sales of the company's products. In exercise of the powers and discretion vested in the petitioner company under the terms of appointment, the petitioner used to transfer the medical representatives from one centre to another. In February, 1980 while Kuriakose was working as medical representative at Calicut was transferred to Bijapur in the State of Karnataka. Kuriakose wanted to remain in the home State. So he applied to review the transfer order; but his application was rejected and he was informed that in the event of not joining duty at Bijapur, it would be treated as disobedience of lawful orders of the petitioner company. Kuriakose did not join duty at Bijapur and consequently a charge sheet was issued to Kuriakose and he was charged with misconduct and wilful disobedience of the lawful order of the petitioner. An enquiry ensued which culminated in the dismissal of Kuriakose from service. A reference was made to the 2nd respondent, the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut by Government of Kerala, under Industrial Disputes Act. Preliminary objections were raised before the Industrial Tribunal. Petitioner contended that Kuriakose was not a workman as defined in S.2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, the 2nd respondent held that Kuriakose was a workman as defined under the I.D. Act. This preliminary finding (Ext. P10) is challenged in these proceedings.

(2.) The term 'workman' has been defined in S.2(s) of the I.D. Act, 1947. It underwent amendments in 1956 and 1982 and as per the 1982 amendment the definition of 'workman' is as follows:

(3.) The question as to whether a medical representative, a sales representative or employees of similar nature are workmen coming under the definition of S.2(s) of the I.D. Act came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in various decisions. The fact that Kuriakose was only a medical representative is not disputed. In the original petition it is alleged that the duties of Kuriakose was to call on doctors, hospitals, stockists, chemists and druggists and to explain to them the efficacy of the petitioner's products and to promote sales of the company's products.