DARUL ULLUNARABIYYAH ISLAMIYYAH Vs. MAULAVI MAHMRUDUL HASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 /227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner, which is an institution registered with the Gujarat State Wakf Board. Challenge by the petitioner is to judgment and award dtd. 30/6/2015 passed by the Labour Court, Bharuch in Reference T No.164 of 2009. The reference was made by respondent No.2, who was employed with the petitioner and according to him, was terminated from the services without following due process of law.

(2.) Learned Advocate for the petitioner has challenged the impugned award on two grounds, i.e. that the petitioner institution cannot be termed to be an "industry" and that respondent No.1 does not fall in the definition of "workman".

(3.) As against this, learned Advocate for the respondent submitted that case of the respondent to the extent that the respondent was appointed as a clerk and was engaged in the activity of all the natures with the institution, even from the evidence given by the petitioner institution itself, it is clear that the respondent was given responsibility of handling library books as well as managing all the printing material, etc. and therefore, contention that the respondent was engaged only in religious teaching, would not take the respondent out of definition of a workman being a religious teacher.