KUNJUMOHAMMED Vs. CHAIRMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Stranger to O.P.2882/1990, who is affected by the decision therein, is the appellant. He challenges the decision of the learned Single Judge allowing the said Original Petition.

(2.) Material facts necessary for the disposal of this writ appeal are as follows.- Watchmen in Cochin Port Trust were engaged by various Steamer Watchmen Contractors. With a view to get equitable allocation of work to the watchmen, Cochin Steamer Watchmens Employment Regulation Scheme, 1983 was introduced by virtue of a conciliation settlement entered into between the representatives of trade unions of watchmen and employers. As per that settlement dated 18-3-1983, the retirement age of watchmen was fixed at 58 years. As a concession to those who have attained the age of 58 years, it was agreed upon to allow them to continue to work for a further period of three more years from the date of commencement of the scheme. 32 watchmen were brought within the purview of this scheme. The 32 watchmen thus retained were to be in employment till 15-5-1987, i.e. three years from 16-5-1984, the date on which the pool came into existence. Governing Body of the Cochin Steamer Watchmen Scheme issued notices on 17-2-1987 and 13-5-1987 informing them that they are due to retire on 15-5-1987. The 32 watchmen, who were thus superannuated with effect from 15-5-1987, submitted representations before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) claiming benefits under the Industrial Disputes Act. Government of India referred the dispute for adjudication to the first respondent, Industrial Tribunal, Alleppey, where it was entertained as I.D.62/1989, Second respondent passed an award in the following terms:-

(3.) The Chairman, Governing Body of the Cochin Steamer Watchmen Scheme challenged the above award in O.P.2882/1990 in so far as the Governing Body was made liable for compensation under the Industrial Disputes Act in relation to the watchmen who were superannuated with effect from 15-5-1987. In other words, in O.P.2882/1990 the petitioner challenged the award directing it to pay retrenchment compensation to 32 workmen for the period from 16-5-1984 to 15-5-1987. Individual Steamer Watchmen Contractors, who were made liable to pay retrenchment compensation to the 32 workmen, who were alleged to have been retrenched on 15-5-1984 as per the award, challenged the same by filing O.P.4698/1990. While disposing that Original Petition the learned Single Judge set aside the direction given in the award making the individual contractors liable, holding:-