MANAGEMENT V L SPL 206 KANNAMANGALAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Labour Court ordered the petitions under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 filed by the second respondent herein, Salesmen in the Village Fair Price Shop. The Management, viz. the appellant herein, while denying the claim, specifically stated that the services of the second respondent-workman were not regularised and that the petition was not maintainable. However, the grievance of the appellant is that the labour Court had not even framed an issue with re- gard to the maintainability of the petitions and granted the relief prayed for. The learned single Judge also, while accepting the case of the respondent, dismissed the writ petition and therefore, this writ appeal has been filed.

(2.) Mr. M.S. Palanisamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Management submitted that the second respondent was not recruited in accordance with Rule 149 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988; therefore, he is a backdoor entrant. His recruitment was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange. He denied that there was any settlement at any point of time between the workman and the appellant-Management under Section 12(3) of the Act. The claim for payment under Section 33-C(2) of the Act is not an ascertained claim and therefore, the labour Court could not have ordered the petition under Section 33-C(2) without this issue being decided. Learned counsel submitted that the entitlement of the second respondent will be governed by G.O. Ms. No. 238, Co-operation Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 19.10.2000 and not G.O. Ms. No. 131, Co-operation Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 4.6.1999. He also referred to G.O. Ms. No. 3, Cooperation Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 6.1.1994 to show that the claim of the second respondent cannot be accepted.

(3.) Mr. R. Ramachandran, on behalf of the workman, appeared before us in person, argued the matter and also filed his written submissions. According to him, the employees of village fair price shops are employees of the respective co-operative societies. It is submitted that the Salesmen in the Public Distribution Shops are attached to the appellant-Management by open competition through the employment exchange. The Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988 came into effect only on 13.4.1988 and therefore, the appointment, which is prior to1988, is neither illegal nor irregular. According to him, the I.D. Act will prevail over the Government Orders referred to above. He referred to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Central Bank of India v. Rajagopalan P.S. AIR 1964SC 743 : 1963-II-LLJ-89. He has also enclosed the deposition of the Management's representative in the various computation petitions and also the Special Bylaws, in addition to the following judgments: Secretary, Plantation Employees Union of South India v. Estate Staff Union of South In- dia(1991) Lab. I.C. 1393; National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan AIR 2000SC 469 : 2000-I-LLJ-247 : (2000) Lab. I.C. 260; Management, V.L. Spl.147 S.V. Nagaram Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Vellore (W.P. Nos.22987 of 2004 etc. batch dated 28.9.2005); Kalavai Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Vellore(W.A. No. 368 of 2004 etc. dated 31.3.2006); Tamil Nadu Kooturavu Oozhiyar Sammelanam v. Govt, of Tamil Nadu (W.P. Nos.41932 of2002 etc. batch dated 8.1.2003); and Jiwan Das Sethi v. State of Punjab (1999) Lab. I.C. 3778 According to him, the order of the learned single Judge should not be interfered with.