LAWS(MAD)-2007-11-624

S MUKKAIAH Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDARY, CATTLE BREEDING AND FODDER DEVELOPMENT; PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND THE SECRETARY, ANIMAL AND HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On November 19, 2007
S Mukkaiah Appellant
V/S
Deputy Director Of Animal Husbandary, Cattle Breeding And Fodder Development; Presiding Officer, Labour Court And The Secretary, Animal And Husbandry Department, Government Of Tamil Nadu Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this Writ Petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to implement the order of the second respondent Labour Court in I.D. No. 101 of 1987 dated 19.1.1993, which was confirmed by this Court in W.P. No. 12960 of 1994 dated 26.7.2005.

(2.) The petitioner joined in the service of the first respondent in August 1976 and he was posted in Chinthamani Kendra Kirama Nilayam, Tirunelveli, as part-time worker. The petitioner was paid monthly salary of Rs. 130/-. After three years, he was transferred to the village Kendra at Sankarankovil. In the year 1982, the petitioner was issued with appointment order dated 4.5.1982 appointing him as Messenger on daily wage basis after his name was sponsored by the Employment Exchange. In the year 1986, the petitioner was terminated from service orally, by the Assistant Medical Officer at Chinthamani Kendra Kirama Nilayam. Therefore, the petitioner raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D. No. 101 of 1987 before the second respondent, Labour Court, and the Labour Court passed an award holding that the termination of the petitioner from service is illegal and the petitioner is directed to be re-instated with continuity of service with backwages. The said award was passed on 19.01.1998. The first respondent filed writ petition in W.P. No. 12960 of 1994 before this Court challenging the said Award of the Labour Court. This Court dismissed the said writ petition by holding that there is no merits in the writ petition. The said order has become final. However the petitioner is yet to be re-instated and backwages is also not paid. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

(3.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.