ATUL PANSARE Vs. HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Writ petition No.2102 of 2006 is filed by the employee challenging the order dated 20th July 2004 passed by the 7th Labour Court, Mumbai in complaint (ULP) No.236 of 1994 directing the respondent company to reinstate the petitioner original complainant with continuity of service but without back wages or they can pay lumpsum compensation of Rs. 2 lacs to the petitioner complainant excluding his legal dues. The same order is challenged by the respondent company by preferring cross writ petition No.2272 of 2006. The issues involved in both these petitions are same. Hence, this is a common order.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the employee Atul Pansare hereinafter will be referred to as the "petitioner" and the Hindustan Lever Ltd. as the "respondent".

(3.) The petitioner joined the respondent company on 10th October 1982 as an Instrumentation Mechanic. After some time, the respondent company declared lockout on 25th June 1988 which continued upto 26th June 1989. During the period of lockout, the Government had intervened. Therefore, the respondent company offered Social Security Rehabilitation Package (SSRP) Scheme to the employees. The respondent company had sent circulars dated 8th March 1989 and 11th April 1989 to all the workers including the petitioner for acceptance of the said SSRP Scheme. When the lock out was lifted at the instance of the State Government, the employees were required to sign individual settlements. In the said settlement, clause No.3 refers to the SSRP Scheme. Some of the employees received the benefit of the said scheme.