SUBHAS BHASKAR GADRE Vs. SECOND LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is no merit in this appeal filed to challenge legality of judgment dated June 8, 1990 delivered by learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 2615 of 1987. By the impugned judgment the learned judge dismissed the petition and upheld the order dated April 29, 1987 passed by presiding Officer, Second Labour Court, Bombay. The facts which gave rise to passing of the order by the Labour Court are as follows :

(2.) THE appellant was appointed as Assistant Librarian on December 7, 1968 in a Library which is run on the premises of the Central Railway at Victoria Terminus. The members of the Library are the gazetted and non-gazetted employees of the Central Railway. The non-gazetted members contribute Rs. 2/- every month, while the gazetted Officers Rs. 3/ -. It is not in dispute that the library is not run by the Railway Administration. It is also not in dispute that the Library is a circulating Library in which magazines are circulated to the members. The library employs a clerk and a peon. The Appellant was promoted as Librarian with effect from December 30, 1972 and his services were terminated by letter dated March 30, 1984. The letter of termination, inter alia, recites that on stock verification it was noticed that several books missing. It was noticed that the appellant was habituated to unauthorised absenteeism and late in the regular attendance and the appellant was not complying with the instruction issued by the Management. The letter further recites that the function of the Library is deteriorating day by day due to inefficient and indifferent working and therefore the service stands terminated.

(3.) THE appellant sought reference after conciliation proceedings ended in failure and the commissioner of labour made reference under Section 10 (1) read with Section 12 (5) of the industrial Disputes Act for adjudication to the Presiding Officer, 2nd Labour Court. The reference was resisted by the respondents claiming that the Library was not an Industry and consequently the appellant was not a workman and therefore it was not open for the Labour court to adjudicate the dispute. The contention found favour with the Labour Court and the reference came to be rejected by order dated April 29, 1987. The appellant challenged legality of the order of the Labour Court by filing writ petition, but the learned single Judge dismissed the petition and concurred with the finding of the Labour Court.