GOPAL METAL CONTAINERS (P) LTD. Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The award dated 29.07.2010 passed in I.D.No. 369 of 2006 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner Management states that they are manufacturing drums used for storing paint, chemical, oil etc., The second respondent was employed in the petitioner's establishment and he was employed as Assistant Supervisor. During the year 2004 and 2005 he was not attending duty regularly. He remained absent himself from attending duty without any prior permission or intimation. The writ petitioner Management issued a memo seeking the explanation of the second respondent. The second respondent promised that he will report duty on 25.01.2006. However, he did not report for duty as promised. Without reporting for duty, he raised an Industrial Dispute on 14.02.2006 stating that he was de-promoted from the post of Assistant Supervisor to Machine Operator and he was removed from service from 23.01.2006.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the writ petitioner is that right from the beginning before the conciliation officer, the stand of the writ petitioner Management was that they have not terminated the service of the second respondent and the second respondent is at liberty to report for duty at any point of time in the post of Assistant Supervisor. The stand of the Management was made clear even before the Labour Court by stating that all along the Management was willing to permit the second respondent to work and he had not reported for duty for which the Management is not responsible.