SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER Vs. INSPECTOR OF LABOUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these writ petitions, the private respondents had filed claim petitions before the Authority constituted under Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act. The writ petitioner is the TANGEDCO. The Management had filed Interlocutory Applications in all the claim petitions raising a preliminary issue. According to the Management, the provisions of the said Act are not applicable to TANGEDCO. The Management wanted the Authority to decide the same as preliminary issue. But the authority, by orders impugned in these writ petitions, dismissed the Interlocutory Applications.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel on either side.

(3.) It appears that the evidence has already been adduced on the side of the claimants/Workmen. Be that as it may, I am of the view that this is an issue that is to be canvassed by the Management in the main hearing of the claim petitions. The Authority is directed to pronounce on the applicability or otherwise of the Tamil Nadu Act 46 of 1981 while passing orders in the main petitions. It is made clear that the issue regarding the applicability is left open. The Authority will consider the legal contentions to be raised by the Management while opposing the claim petitions uninfluenced by the fact that the Interlocutory Applications filed by the Management raising it as a preliminary issue were dismissed or any observations made in this order.