OLYMPIA EXPORT PVT LTD Vs. LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the employer and is directed against award dated 4.4.2006 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court (I), UP. Kanpur in Adjudication Case No. 1 of 2001. The matter which was referred to the Labour Court was as to whether action of petitioner employer terminating the services of its workman Zakhir Khan, respondent No. 2 in this writ petition with effect from 29.4.2000 was just and valid or not. Respondent No. 2 was employed by the petitioner in 1993. The case of the workman was that when he demanded higher pay, the employer on 29.4.2000 asked him to sit in a closed room and obtained in writing from him that he had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 5200/- by over-charging the same from the customers and he would return the said amount to the employer and that workman was also compelled to sign on blank paper and on four undated vouchers.

(2.) The case of the employer was that the workman resigned on 29.4.2000 which was accepted by them on 3.5.2000 and he was paid his dues. It was further pleaded by the employer that the workman was caught red handed overcharging customers. It was also pleaded that nature of work of the workman was supervisory hence he was not workman and his wages were Rs. 1600/- per month. The workman had also contended that immediately after the expulsion he attempted to lodge FIR but the police officer refused to do so under pressure of the employer.

(3.) The Labour Court held that signatures on the photostat copy of the resignation filed by the employer were not at the proper place and along with signatures thumb impression was unnecessarily obtained which proved that initially signatures were obtained on the blank paper and thereafter resignation was transcribed. On this ground alone Labour Court held that resignation was forced hence termination was illegal. Ultimately, Labour Court directed reinstatement with full back wages. Through interim order dated 21.12.2006 passed in this writ petition, petitioner was directed to comply with the provisions of section 17-B of Industrial Disputes Act.