THILAGAVATHI S Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT MADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated November 22, 2006 made in W.P. Nos. 12028/2000 and 58/2001 whereby and whereunder, the award of the Labour Court in I.D. No. 353/1991 dated May 12, 1999 was set aside in W.P. No. 12028/2000 and also claim of the appellant was negatived in W.P. No. 58/2001.

(2.) The facts are briefly stated below: The second respondent Society by name Madurai Children Aid Society (for short, 'the Society'), represented by its Secretary, is registered under the Societies Registration Act and the appellant was working as an Assistant Matron on a monthly salary of Rs. 27/-. In view of her misconduct and misbehaviour, the management terminated her service by order dated September 18, 1990 and her accounts were settled. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D. No. 353/1991 in which a preliminary issue was raised as to whether, the second respondent is an 'Industry', wherein it was held by the Labour Court that the Society was an industry, as against which, the second respondent filed Writ Petition in W.P. No. 13691/1994 and a learned single Judge of this Court held that the second respondent was not an Industry within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Aggrieved over the same, appellant filed W.A. No. 38/2006 and a Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal and directed the Labour Court to hear afresh and pass orders. The matter was taken up for adjudication by the Labour Court once again and by award dated May 12, 1999, Labour Court held that the second respondent society is an Industry and granted the relief of reinstatement of the appellant with continuity of service but without back-wages.

(3.) The second respondent challenged the said order in W.P. No. 12028/2000 on the ground that it is not an industry and therefore, the appellant is not entitled to the reliefs as granted by the Labour Court. The appellant preferred W.P. No. 58/2001 aggrieved against the portion of the judgment disallowing back-wages. Both the writ petitions were heard together and a common order was passed by the learned single Judge holding that the second respondent society is not an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act and set aside the award of the Labour Court. Incidentally, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant in W.P. No. 58/2001.