R KRISHNAMOORTHY Vs. TAMIL NADU MERCANTILE BANK LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/1st Respondent/Petitioner has projected this Writ Appeal as against the order dated 03.12.2009 in W.P.No.6970 of 2000 passed by the Learned Single Judge in allowing the Writ Petition filed by the 1st Respondent/Bank (Employer).

(2.) The 2nd Respondent/Industrial Tribunal, in its Award dated 07.10.1999 in I.D.No.5 of 1996 filed by the Appellant /Petitioner, has, inter alia, held that 'the total period of employment of the Petitioner was only 9 months and that his termination is void ab initio' and resultantly, ordered for his reinstatement in service with backwages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits and accordingly, passed an Award thereto.

(3.) The Learned Single Judge, while allowing the Writ Petition filed by the 1st Respondent/Bank, has, among other things, observed that 'the 1st Respondent (Appellant) was only a Probationer and his service was terminated during the time of such probation on account of unsatisfactory performance. The said aspect has not been considered by the Industrial Tribunal' and further opined that 'the Tribunal in para 8 of the Award rendered a factual finding that the 1st Respondent (Appellant) has continuously worked for a period of 240 days. However, the Tribunal omitted to note that the period of such service was only as Probationer and the service was terminated only during the course of probation. Therefore, there is no question of violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act as stated by the Industrial Tribunal' and resultantly, set aside the Award dated 07.10.1999 in I.D.No.5 of 1996 passed by the 2nd Respondent/Industrial Tribunal and consequently, allowed the Writ Petition.