LAWS(KER)-1993-6-24

KERALA SOLVENT EXTRACTIONS LTD Vs. A UNNIKRISHNAN

Decided On June 04, 1993
KERALA SOLVENT EXTRACTIONS LTD. Appellant
V/S
A.UNNIKRISHNAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against the common judgment dated December 2, 1992, of the learned single Judge in O. P. Nos. 8348 of 1992 and 12063 of 1992 disposing of writ petitions. The appellant before us is the Kerala Solvent Extractions Ltd. In the writ petitions, the appellant questioned the correctness of the awards passed by the Labour Court in favour of the respondents workmen.

(2.) THE workmen in question in the two writ petitions were employed by the appellant-company as badli headload workers in godowns. A notice was issued as per Exhibit P-1 stating that only those persons who had studied upto VIII standard or below should apply. The workmen, who applied for employment stating that they had passed VII standard did not specifically mention that they had passed SSLC. It was only after their appointment that the appellant came to know that they had passed SSLC and that there was a violation of the notification. The appointments were made in the year 1988, and the services of the workmen were sought to be terminated by the management in 1989, by Exhibit P-5 memo, and, in fact, the termination orders were passed. The workmen questioned the same, and sought for a reference to the Labour Court. The question referred to the Labour Court was as to whether the termination of service of the workmen was correct and whether they are entitled to back-wages, if reinstated.

(3.) THE Labour Court passed two awards, which were respectively published in the Kerala Gazette, dated May 19, 1992, and July 21, 1992, setting aside the termination order without back-wages, but with continuity of service. The Labour Court came to the conclusion that the notification in question did not specifically state that persons who had educational qualification above VIII standard were disqualified or ineligible, nor did it say any fraud was played by the workmen. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the Labour Court though it fit to deny backwages while ordering reinstatement. It also directed continuity of service.