G VETRIVEL Vs. STATION MASTER SINGAPORE AIRLINES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are two writ petitions filed by two employees challenging the Awards passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in I.D.Nos.107 and 109 of 2001, dated 24.5.2002, the second respondent in W.P.No.45488 of 2002, in and by which, the claims of the petitioners for reinstatement were rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petitions have been filed.

(2.) WHILE advancing his arguments, Mr.K.M.Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the writ petitions, has submitted that the petitioners G.Vetrivel and D.Sasikumar were temporarily appointed as Loaders on 17.3.1994 to load and unload the baggages in the Aircraft. The Station Master, Singapore Airlines, the first respondent in W.P.No.45488 of 2002 and second respondent in W.P.No.35205 of 2004 has also issued the passes to them to enter into the International Airport Authority of India and to carry out the day-to day work. Further, the respondents Airlines also used to write letters to the International Airport Authority of India to accept the passes for carrying out the work. Thereafter, from 22.3.1994 till 16.6.1994, temporary passes were issued by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security to enter the Airport and to work under the respondents Aircraft.

(3.) PER contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents Airlines, has submitted by refuting all the allegations made by the petitioners that at no point of time, the petitioners worked with the respondents Airlines for more than 240 days. Even if they worked for 240 days, when they approached the Labour Court, it is their duty to discharge the burden by producing evidence that they have worked for more than 240 days. He further submitted that in the present case, both the petitioners by their own mouth have categorically admitted before the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court by standing in the witness box that they did not remember the number of days they worked. Even though the Labour Court ventured, they were not able to establish their case by producing relevant documents viz., Identity Card or Pass book said to have been issued beyond 240 days. He further submits that in the absence of the said documents like Identity Cards, Pay slips etc, the Labour Court could not be able to draw any adverse inference against the management. On this basis, he prayed for dismissing the writ petitions. In support of his submission, he also relied upon the following two Judgments of the Apex Court:- "1) KRISHNA BHAGYA JAL NIGAM LTD. VS. MOHD. RAFI (2006) 9 SCC 697) 2) SRIRAM INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD. VS. MAHAK SINGH AND ORS. (AIR 2007 SC 1370)"