THE MANAGEMENT, M S MANI NADAR, PROPRIETOR, MEENAKSHI HARDWARE STORES AND THE MANAGEMENT, M VEERAMANI, MEENAKSHI HARDWARE STORES Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND N MURUGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Management having unsuccessfully challenged the award dated 27th July, 1994 passed by Labour Court, Madurai, in I.D. No.264/90, preferred the writ appeal against the order passed by learned single Judge.

(2.) According to the appellant, the 2nd respondent herein was working under his wife, Pushpammal, being a proprietary concern and after her death, the same was closed. During the life time of his wife Pushpammal, the 2nd respondent suddenly left the service on 20th Jan., 1990 on his own accord. Subsequently, he filed a false claim that he was dismissed from service without any charge or enquiry and raised an industrial dispute Under Section 2(A)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, registered as I.D. No.264/90, which was allowed by learned Presiding officer, Labour Court, by impugned award.

(3.) Further case of the appellant is that the management of Meenakshi Hardware Store was closed and the 2nd respondent having left the service voluntarily on 20th Jan., 1990, the dispute as raised was not maintainable. Learned Presiding Officer should have rejected the claim as the 2nd respondent was gainfully employed as a commission agent and having an income over Rs.1,000/= per month.