G SAVITHRI Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL OF TAMIL NADU; DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SILK WORM SEED PROJECT, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, SENIOR RESEARCH OFFICER, SILK WORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned award dated 29.7.1991 from the Industrial Tribunal of Tamil Nadu, Madras in I.D.No. 22 of 1988, to quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with full back-wages and continuity of service and other attendant benefits.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of Industrial Tribunal dated 29.7.91 made in Industrial Dispute No. 22/98 by which the Industrial Tribunal held that the non-employment of the writ petitioner who is a causal worker due to non-availability of the work is justified.

(3.) The case of the writ petitioner is that he was employed by 2nd respondent-board to work as a field worker in their Seri-cultural Research Centre, Coimbatore from 14.8.75 and she was working there continuously for 7 years till 38.7.72. She was transferred to 3rd respondent's Silk Worm Seed Production Centre, Coimbatore, which is an another unit of 2nd respondent, and she continued to work from 1.8.82 as a grainage worker till 15.9.84. on 15.9.84, she was informed that her services were not required and she need not come for work from 16.9.84. She raised a dispute before the Regional labour Commissioner, Bangalore, then with the Regional labour Commissioner, Madras on 17.8.85. Since the conciliation failed and failure report was sent to the Central Government and an order of reference dated 24.3.88 was made to the Industrial Tribunal. The Industrial Tribunal by its order dated 29.7.91 held that the non-employment of the writ petitioner due to the nonavailability of the work is justified and that respondents 2 and 3 should have paid one month pay and compensation when refusing employment from 16.9.84 by enforcing Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The tribunal further observed that being a casual worker, it was not possible to reinstate her into service. Aggrieved by the said order dt.29.7.91 the above writ petition has been filed by the above writ petitioner on 9.7.97.