S BALAMURUGAN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is the award of the Labour Court, Madurai in I.D.No.9 of 2004 dated 22.01.2011.

(2.) The facts arising out of this writ petition are as follows: The petitioner claims that he was appointed as Watchman in the year 1986 in the respondent State Transport Corporation and he was working in the said capacity without any break, for about 16 years. On 18.04.2002, according to the petitioner, he was orally removed from service. The last drawn monthly wages, according to the petitioner, was Rs.2,100/-. Challenging the said oral termination, the petitioner raised the above Industrial Dispute.

(3.) In the counter filed before the Labour Court, the second respondent herein submitted that the petitioner was never employed directly by the second respondent. According to him, the petitioner was engaged only as Contract Labour by means of an agreement. It is also stated that the said contract was renewed from time to time from 1997 onwards. The contract expired on 15.04.2002. According to the second respondent, the petitioner is not entitled for the benefit of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, because, the termination of services of the petitioner was on account of non-renewal of the contract of employment, which falls within the ambit of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act.