VENKATESH SEENA NAIDU Vs. NETEL INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present Petition is to the Order, dtd. 12/2/2016 passed by the Presiding Officer, 8th Labour Court, Mumbai answering the Reference filed by the Petitioner in negative by holding that Petitioner is not a 'Workman' within the meaning of Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act (I.D. Act), 1947.

(2.) The Petitioner was appointed in Respondent No.1- Company as Assistant Manager-Projects (WWT) vide Appointment Order, dtd. 25/4/2005. He came to be confirmed in service by redesignating him on the post of Manager-Development (WWT) vide Order, dtd. 25/2/2006. According to Petitioner, his job involved predominantly discharging duties of technical nature. It is Petitioner's case that, he was subjected to harassment, Mental Agony and torture at the instance of his superiors and by Letter, dtd. 19/4/2006 (erroneously transcribed as 19/4/2004), his services were terminated with immediate effect.

(3.) Petitioner approached Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Mumbai and filed Statement of Justification, dtd. 19/8/2006. Upon failure of conciliation proceedings, The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation) made a reference of the dispute regarding termination of services of the Petitioner and his claim for reinstatement to 8th Labour Court, Mumbai for adjudication. Petitioner filed his Statement of Claim. Respondent No.1 resisted the claim by filing its Written Statement inter alia raising a defence that Petitioner is not a "Workman" within the meaning of Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It also justified termination of services of Petitioner on merits. The Labour Court framed total 8 issues. Issue No.1 is about Petitioner fitting within the definition of the term 'Workman' under Sec. 2(s) of the I.D. Act. By its Judgment and Order, 12/2/2016, the Labour Court answered Issue No.1 in negative and held that Petitioner is not a Workman. Therefore, no occasion arose for answering Issues No.2 to 8. The Labour Court has answered the Reference in negative by its Award, dtd. 12/2/2016, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present Petition.