SUBRAMANI Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER II ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal has been preferred against the order passed by a learned Judge of this Court in W. P. No. 12855 of 1991, dated 23. 2. 1999, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This is a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the 1st respondent in C. P. No. 898 of 1996 and to quash the order passed therein dated 5. 6. 1990.

(2.) 2. 1 The Claim Petition No. 898 of 1986 was filed by the petitioner/respondent under Section 33 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming that the petitioner as a driver under the respondent-2 / Special Officer, Madurantakam Co-operative Suger Mills Ltd. , Paladam Post, had worked for more than 8 hours and hence, he is entitled to double the pay. But the 2nd respondent herein had stopped the additional pay paid by him from October, 1985. Claiming Rs. 16,649. 21 towards additional pay for the period from October, 1985 to August, 1986, the said application was filed. 2. 2 It was contended on behalf of the 2nd respondent herein / employer that the petition itself is not maintainable under Section 33 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act and that the petitioner is not working in an Industry, since he is in no way connected with the protection of the respondent's factory in any manner. 2. 3 After going through the averments in the petition and the counter and after taking into consideration the evidence both oral and documentary, the learned Additional Labour Judge, Chennai, has allowed the petition filed by the petitioner granting the relief of additional pay of Rs. 16,649. 21 as prayed for. Aggrieved by the findings of the learned Labour Judge, the employer had preferred the writ petition No. 12855 of 1991. After going through the merits and demerits of the case, the learned single Judge of this Court has come to the conclusion that the impugned order passed by the learned Labour Judge under Section 33 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act is not maintainable on the ground that the employer / Co-operative Sugar Mill will be governed by the by-laws and also the circular issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Society alone and that being the position, the order of the learned Labour Judge, under challenge, is not sustainable and consequently allowed the Writ Petition setting aside the award passed by the learned Labour Judge in C. P. No. 898 of 1986 on the file of the Presiding Officer, II Additional Labour Court, Chennai, which necessitated the employer to prefer this writ appeal.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant Mr. D. Hari Parandaman, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. N. Balasubramanian learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and Mr. S. S. Venkataraman learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and considered their respective submissions.