DHARNIDHAR RAMBHAU KATHALE Vs. SECOND LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the employees of the respondent No. 2 (for short 'the respondent') and are working at the Thermal Power Station, Khaperkheda as Time-keepers. They moved the Labour Court under sub-section (2) of Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 25th July 1984, contending that they are entitled to avail of the public holidays, local holidays, optional holidays and the holidays on account of 2nd and 4th Saturdays. They have essentially based their claim on the Circular No. ESTI III/Misc./6310 dated 22nd December, 1966 issued by the Bombay Head Office of the respondent. According to them, the respondent did not extend the benefits and privileges to them to which they are entitled in accordance with the circular, referred supra. The claim of the petitioners was contested by the respondent on various grounds, inter alia on the ground that the circular in question does not relate to the holidays. The respondent contended that the petitioners were given six paid holidays according to its rules and they are not entitled to any other holidays beyond that. The respondent further contended that the claim involved an industrial dispute which would not be adjudicated upon by the Labour Court under Section 33-C(2) of the Act and, therefore, the application was not tenable. The Labour Court dismissed the application. Hence the present petition.

(2.) The question that falls for consideration is the interpretation of the circular, referred supra. In order to appreciate the circular, it is better to reproduce the same :

(3.) The establishment of the respondent consists of (1) Administrative Office; and (2) Power Stations. The petitioners are working at the Power Station. 'Administrative Office' has been defined in Regulation 9(1) of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board Employees' Service Regulations, as follows :