RC PATEL & CO. Vs. CHATARSINGH FATEHSINH KATHVADIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge is made by the petitioner-Firm to the award of the Labour Court where it granted the 25% back wages with all other consequential benefits in favour of the original workman, who was working as driver with the petitioner-Firm. The petitioner is a partnership firm and is engaged in the activity of leasing out premises for industrial, marriage and other purposes. Petitioner No.2 is one of the partners of the partnership-firm and it is her case that original workmen was a personal driver of Petitioners and was in no manner connected with the office work of the petitioner-Firm. The workmen was working only 2 to 4 hours a day to take the parents and family members of petitioner to different places and also to the temple. The original workman was allotted a quarter in R.C. Patel and Co., where no rent was collected of the said quarter. Since, the heirs of the original workman denied to vacate the premises on demise of original workman, a Suit was also filed before the Small Causes Court. There is no dispute taken by the petitioner-firm that the original workman served for a long period of service and when he attained the age of superannuation and was unable to drive at night hours, the petitioners chose not to risk the lives of the family members, and therefore, he was requested to consult an ophthalmologist and get a fitness certificate. However, same was not furnished by the original workman and he attained the age of superannuation on 15.02.1985.

(2.) It is the say of the petitioners that to their shocking surprise, a Demand Notice was received from the Union of which the original workman was a member, wherein he had asked for his dues and also for his termination without following the procedure.

(3.) Reply to the same was also given by the petitioner and the original workman approached the Labour Court with a reference being Reference (LCV) No. 417/1985, as the conciliation failed.