K N ASOKAN Vs. PRESINDING OFFICE LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The workman, who has lost the case in I.D. No. 370/1991 on the file of the Labour Court, Coimbatore, has filed the present writ petition challenging the award dated December 29, 1995 and for a direction against the second respondent to reinstate him in service with all backwages and attendant benefits.

(2.) 2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed in 1985 in the second respondent/School Management as a Baker and was paid salary of Rs. 745/- per month and Rs. 150/- as winter allowance. According to the petitioner, in respect of service conditions certain conciliation proceedings were initiated by the Workers Union and while that was pending, on April 12, 1991, the petitioner and other workmen were terminated on the basis that the second respondent/School Management wanted to reorganize the work in the establishment. The petitioner has sent a letter to the second respondent to reconsider the decision and as the same was not considered, he raised a dispute before the Labour Officer, Coonoor under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity, "the Act"). According to him, even if there was no post of Baker, the petitioner should have been engaged as a Watchman.

(3.) 3.1. The first leg of argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the termination of the petitioner by the second respondent on April 12, 1991, while the dispute relating to service conditions of the employees was pending conciliation, is hit by Section 33(1) of the Act and the same is not valid as the same has been passed without express permission from the authority before which the proceeding was pending.