JASBIR KAUR DHALIWAL Vs. NEPC AIRLINES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question involved in this writ petition is whether the Labour Court under section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) has jurisdiction to determine whether lay-off compensation is payable to the workmen.

(2.) A few facts of the case are as follows : the petitioner was appointed as a Trainee Air-Hostess by respondent No. 1 on 16-6-1994. In October, 1994, she was promoted and appointed as a Line Hostess and was confirmed in the said post in Grade V on 1-9-1995. Later, the petitioner was promoted as check cabin crew. Till May, 1997, the petitioner performed her duties as rostered. The petitioner continued to report for duty till June, 1997, however, no job was allotted to her as the aircraft were grounded due to shortage of fuel. On 10-11-1997, the petitioner was given a letter of termination of service. The reason mentioned in the said letter for terminating the service of the petitioner was that she had refused to report for work at Chennai by 3-11-1997, despite being told to do so by respondent No. 1.

(3.) THE petitioner preferred an application under 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act being Application No. LC-2/502 of 1997 claiming certain amounts from respondent No. 1. These benefits included kit allowance, flying allowance for the months of March, April and May, 1997, salary for the months of April and May, 1997 and retrenchment compensation from 1-6-1997 to 10-11-1997 on account of forced unemployment alongwith bonus, medical entitlement and refund of amounts deducted and retained by respondent No. 1. The total amount claimed by the petitioner was Rs. 1,49,300/ -. The course of the petitioner in the application was that from 1-6-1997 to the date on which her services were terminated, that is, on 11-11-1997, she was entitled to lay-off compensation payable under the Industrial Disputes Act due to her forced unemployment.