KOMAL FASHION Vs. JOGINDER R. VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the Judgment and Award dtd. 10/12/2018 passed by the learned 3rd Labour Court, Mumbai in Reference (IDA) No. 254 of 2014.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present petition, as pleaded by the petitioner, are that the respondent was employed with the petitioner as a Pattern Maker and had rendered continuous service from October 2007 till 23/3/2010. It is the case of the respondent that his services came to be orally and illegally terminated by the petitioner's proprietor, namely Mr. Amit Bajaj, without following due process of law. According to the respondent, his last drawn wages were Rs.17,200.00 per month. It is further his contention that at the time of his appointment, no appointment letter, leave card, pay-slips, or attendance card were issued to him though the petitioner establishment allegedly employed more than 50 workmen. The respondent has further contended that despite the establishment being covered under the provisions of ESIC and Provident Fund enactments, the said statutory benefits were not extended to him. It is also alleged that though his duty hours, as well as those of other workmen, were from 9.30 a.m. to 6.30 p.m., he was regularly compelled to work till 9.00 p.m. without payment of overtime wages in accordance with the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948.

(3.) The respondent has further contended that during the entire tenure of his service, he discharged his duties diligently, sincerely, and obediently and never gave any occasion to the management to issue any memo, warning, or show cause notice against him. According to him, his service record remained unblemished throughout his employment. It is his further case that on several occasions he personally requested the proprietor of the petitioner to issue attendance card, pay-slips, leave card, and wages in lieu of earned leave, however, except for false assurances, no action was taken. On the contrary, according to the respondent, on account of making such demands, his services were orally and illegally terminated by Mr. Amit Bajaj with effect from 23/3/2010 without adherence to due process of law.