VIDYUT METALLICS PVT. LTD. Vs. KAMGAR EKTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner ? M/s. Vidyut Metallics Pvt. Ltd., by this Petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, impugns an order dated 11/4/2016 (below Exhibits C 19 and CA15) passed by the Member Industrial Court at Thane.

(2.) Facts of the case in brief are, the petitioner is a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner was engaged in the business of manufacturing of safety razor blades, shaving products, etc. It is the case of the petitioner that prior to transfer of its business, as a part of its corporate social responsibility, had engaged trainees in its Thane factory. They paid monthly stipend to the said trainees. The said trainees at the time of appointment had entered into an agreement with petitioner ? company. According to petitioner, by the Business Transfer Agreement dated 30 th December, 2010, signed between the petitioner ? Company and respondent No.2 ? Company (M/s. SuperMax Personal Care Pvt. Ltd.), the "business" of the petitioner ? Company, where the respondent No.2 ? Company including all its employees, trainees, assets and liabilities as a going concern, excluding immovable properties. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter they are not in position to provide training to the concerned trainees upon transfer of business of the said factory undertaking as a going concern.

(3.) It is the petitioner's further case that upon transfer of business to respondent No.2 ? company, with effect from 18/3/2011, all trainees engaged by them became the trainees of the respondent No.2 ? Company. Therefore, effective from 18/3/2011 the concerned trainees started working for respondent No.2 ? company and were imparted training by respondent No.2 ? Company. It is the petitioner's case that in view of the Business Transfer Agreement, these trainees cannot claim any relationship in their capacity as trainees and/or workmen with the petitioner ? Company. The petitioner averred that traineeship with petitioner came to an end by virtue of the this stand, petitioners have taken a stand that the trainees have left their traineeship on their own accord as petitioner was not in a position to impart training and they were engaged by respondent No.2 M/s. SuperMax Personal Care Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent No.2') with effect from 18/3/2011.