CIMCO BIRLA LIMITED Vs. ROWENA LEWIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. By consent of parties, Rule made returnable forthwith.

(2.) This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court, Mumbai in complaint (ULP) NO.588 of 1996 dated 16th April 2007. By the said judgment and order the Industrial Court, Mumbai was pleased to allow the complaint ULP No.588 of 1996 filed by the respondent herein and declared that the petitioner herein had committed unfair labour practice under item 9 schedule IV of MRTU AND PULP Act, 1971 and further directed the petitioner to comply with the order passed in complaint (ULP) NO.339 of 1987. The brief facts in a nutshell are as under:

(3.) The respondent was appointed as Secretary-cum-Stenographer by the petitioner on 1st September 1976. Her services were terminated by the petitioner on 30th December 1987. Thereafter, a complaint was filed by the respondent in complaint (ULP)No.339 of 1987 in the Labour Court challenging the said termination. The Labour Court by judgment and order dated 25th March 1996 declared that the petitioner had engaged in unfair labour practice under item 1(a) 1(b) 1 (d) and 1 (f) of Schedule IV of MRTU AND PULP Act, 1971. The petitioner was directed to reinstate the respondent with full back wages and continuity of service. It is the case of the respondent that pursuant thereto the respondent wrote letters requesting the petitioner to reinstate her and to implement the order dated 25th March 1996. In the meantime the petitioner had filed a revision application against the order dated 25th March 1996 vide Revision Application No.72 of 1996. Since the order passed by the Labour court was not implemented a complaint under item 9 of schedule IV of the said Act was filed by the respondent vide complaint (ULP) No.588 of 1996. In the meantime, revision application filed by the petitioner against the order of the Labour Court in the first complaint filed by the respondent was rejected on 8th October 1996. The Industrial Court directed the petitioner to deposit up to date wages as per order of the Labour court dated 25th March 1996 within one month.