GOVERNMENT MILK SCHEME Vs. DAGADU BALBHIM KAMBALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have challenged the Award dated 26-8-1992 given by the Labour Court, Kolhapur in Reference No. 30 of 1986 wherein the respondent workman had raised an Industrial dispute and prayed for reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service.

(2.) THE case of the respondent-workman before the Labour Court was that he was employed under the petitioners as a Driver from 22-11-1977. From 1-1-1984 he was not allowed to join employment. Inspite of several efforts he was not allowed to join his duties and therefore, he had raised an Industrial Dispute for reinstatement with full back wages and other consequential benefits. In his statement of claim before the Labour Court he has given the details of his service and has also averred that he was required by the Regional Transport Officer, Kolhapur, to be examined by an Opthalmologist for defect in eyes. The Civil Surgeon certified that his eye sight was defective and recommended that he should be given some other light work. Thereafter the respondent prayed for light work on the basis of the said Medical Certificate. The petitioners did not consider the said application at all. The respondent employee challenged the legality of his termination of employment being illegal and in contravention of section 25f of the Industrial Disputes Act, and in violation of principles of natural justice as no enquiry was held before termination. The petitioners filed their written statement wherein the fact of employment of respondent was admitted. Several allegations of misconducts were made. It was specifically pointed out that the respondent was arrogant and irregular in attendance and that he also met with an accident as he was under the influence of liquor and that prosecution case was going on. Under the aforesaid circumstances the petitioners have tried to justify the case of termination against the respondent. The petitioners did not adduce any oral evidence before the Labour Court. The respondent had examined himself. His evidence to the effect that he was in employment as a driver from 22-11-1977 and that he was made permanent in the year 1977-78 and that his services were orally terminated from 1-1-1984 without issuance of charge-sheet or any enquiry. He has also specifically averred that no compensation was paid to him and no notice pay in lieu of notice was given to him. The Labour Court recorded findings against the petitioners holding that the termination of the workman was illegal as there was no domestic enquiry held against him and that if he was guilty of absentism or any other misconduct for which he was being punished a domestic enquiry ought to have been held by the petitioners. The Labour Court has also found that the case of abandonment by the workman tried to be made out by the petitioners would also attract the provisions of section 25f of the Industrial Disputes Act. Unfortunately the petitioners have not complied with the law in any manner. The petitioners have violated every provisions of law. If they had taken even a little care to take steps as per law to terminate the services of such an employee the action perhaps would have been legal and proper. The petitioners have handled the proceedings most negligently. Even before the Labour Court they could have adduced their own evidence to justify the action of termination. That part has also not been followed by the petitioners for the reasons best known to them. The petitioners therefore, must thank themselves for outcome. The Labour Court however has not directed reinstatement of the respondent as a driver considering the fact that he had defect in the right eye as certified by the Civil Surgeon. The award of the Labour Court is just and proper. The Labour Court has correctly come to the conclusion that the services of the respondent workman were illegally and improperly terminated, and therefore, he was entitled to reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service but the Labour Court has exercised his discretion not to award reinstatement but to award a sum of Rs. 5000/- in lieu of reinstatement as compensation. The Labour Court has awarded full back wages from 1-1-1984 till 26-8-1992. According to me the Labour Court has rightly and justly moulded the relief. There is no reason to interfere with the impugned award given by the Labour Court. The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

(3.) IT is further directed that the petitioners shall compute the amounts payable under the award within a period of three months from today and the same shall be paid to the respondent-workman with interest from 1-10-1992 at the rate of 12% p. a. Certified copy of this order is expedited. Petition dismissed.