V. MOHANAN Vs. DIVAKARAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under challenge in this writ petition is Ext.P1 award passed by the Labour Court, Kollam.

(2.) The petitioner was working in an Oil Mill as a machine operator from 1974 onwards. The proprietor of the Oil mill passed away in the year 1990. Thereafter the Oil mill was shifted to another place and the petitioner was denied employment. The dispute regarding denial of employment eventually came to be adjudicated by the Labour Court. The essential contention raised by the management was that upon the death of the original proprietor, the oil mill was closed down. The petitioner alleges that it became evident that the essential conditions for closure of the establishment as contemplated by the statute was not followed and that the petitioner was not paid any compensation at all. According to the petitioner, there was no valid closure and as such the alleged termination of service of the petitioner is also not valid. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled for the reliefs in the case; it is alleged. However, according to the petitioner, without adverting to this crucial aspect of the matter, the Labour Court passed Ext.P1 award holding that since the establishment closed down, there is no denial of employment to the petitioner and that he is not entitled for any relief. It is with this background the petitioner has come up before this Court.

(3.) The notice sent to the second respondent was returned stating that he is no more. However, later, at the request of the petitioner, the second respondent was removed from the array of parties. No counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 1 and 3 who entered appearance.