A M MUNISWAMY Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed by the management, which is the respondent before the Labour Court, challenging the award passed in I.D.No.9 of 1984, dated 4.8.2004.

(2.) THE second respondent was appointed as Checking Inspector in the year 1966 in the petitioner/management and he is stated to have worked for 16 years. Without any notice, the petitioner is stated to have terminated the second respondent from service on 22.11.1982. THE termination of the second respondent was due to the reason that the second respondent wanted to start an union and he has also submitted an application by way of demand in Application No.134 of 1982.

(3.) THE further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is oral evidence by the second respondent to the effect that he is getting rental income to the extent of Rs.1200/- and he has been doing business along with his wife and in spite of it reinstatement has been ordered by the Labour Court with back-wages as a routine, and the same is incorrect. However, it is the admitted fact that the second respondent has reached the age of superannuation as early as in the year 2002 and therefore, this issue has become academic.