LAWS(ALL)-1992-8-112

SWADESHI POLYTEX LTD. Vs. LABOUR COURT AND ORS.

Decided On August 09, 1992
SWADESHI POLYTEX LTD. Appellant
V/S
Labour Court And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE subject matter of this writ petition is a preliminary issue before the Labour Court in an industrial adjudication. The Petitioner Messrs Swadeshi polytex Limited hiving its registered office at New Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad, hereinafter referred to as the employer has filed the present writ petition against the proceedings of the Labour Court, Meerut in adjudication case no. 110 of 1978 in the matter relating to an industrial dispute between this employer and its workman Mr. L.S. Sharma. The State Government by an order dated June 10, 1978 referred the following matter for adjudication under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 : -

(2.) THE brief facts on which the employer and the Respondent workman concerned are not at issue are that it is not an issue that Mr. L.S. Sharma, the workman was employed at its Ghaziabad establishment. He was transferred to Ahmedabad by an order of the employer dated January 11, 1975. It appears that the workman concerned did not respond to the directions of the company on his transfer. Hereinafter the rift between the employer and the workman begins.

(3.) BEFORE the Labour Court the parties exchanged their written statements. The workman made a reference to these proceedings before the Labour Court in his written statement in paragraphs 9 and 10 The contention of the workman in his written statement was that during the course of the proceedings before the civil courts a termination order visited him. Thus; he contends that he sought conciliation which failed and consequently the matter was referred for adjudication as a reference, before the Labour Court, Meerut. The employer also filed his written statement, and explained in the written statement why the order of termination had to be passed. The case of the employer is that as the workman would not obey the transfer order, this amounted to misconduct and, thus, the workman's services were liable to be terminated.