AYURVEDA RASASHALA Vs. SAROJINI N GANDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Poona, made a reference under Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for adjudication of an industrial dispute to the Presiding Officer, First Labour Court, Poona, and the First Labour Court has passed an Award on June 30, 1976, directing reinstatement of respondent No. 1 and has also awarded back wages from May 11, 1973 onwards. The Award is being challenged in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the employer company. The employer company Ayurved Rasashala is in the custody of the Receiver appointed by the Civil Court and the Receiver has filed the present petition.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 was employed as a Clerk on July 16, 1968 by the petitioner on a total emolument of Rs. 75/- per month. On January 1, 1970, the respondent No. 1 was confirmed in service as a clerk. It is the case of the petitioner that on April 1, 1970, the respondent No. 1 was promoted as a Junior Officer on a scale of Rs. 150-8-230-EB-10-330-EB-15-405. The services of the respondent No. 1 were retrenched by an order dated May 11, 1973. The respondent No. 1 was paid the retrenchment compensation and all other dues as contemplated by the provisions of the law. It is not in dispute the respondent No. 1 received an amount of Rs. 2500.70 on May 11, 1973 from the petitioner company.

(3.) On June 11, 1973, the respondent No. 1 served a demand notice on the petitioner claiming that the order of retrenchment was bad and she is entitled to reinstatement in service. On the failure of the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner of Labour has made a reference on February 27, 1974. In her statement of claim filed by respondent No. 1 before the Labour Court, the respondent No. 1 has specifically stated that the order of retrenchment was wrong and contrary to the provisions of law as the employees who were appointed subsequent to the date of her appointment as clerks were retained in service, while she was retrenched and thereby the employer has contravened the provisions of section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.