EXHIBITION SOCIETY Vs. LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions, similar questions of fact and law arise. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order.

(2.) The Petitioner is a Society registered under the A.P. Societies Registration Act and runs Industrial Exhibition in Hyderabad apart from undertaking other activities. Respondent No. 2 in both the writ petitions (for short 'the Respondents') were appointed as Assistant Engineer (Civil) and Administrative Officer respectively in the year 1998. Both of them were put on probation for a period of six months. The orders of appointment inter alia provide for the declaration of probation on completion of six months or extension thereof. It is also mentioned that the Respondents shall be under obligation to do work beyond office hours when the Exhibition is on.

(3.) The Respondents filed M.P. Nos. 24 and 25 of 2002 before the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act'). According to them, the Petitioner issued a Circular, dated 31.10.1998, directing that the staff members of the Society shall be under obligation to work from 7.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. from 07.11.1998 to 28.02.1999 and that they shall be entitled to be paid 70% extra remuneration for the said period. Their grievance was that though the benefit of the Circular was extended to all other employees, they were not paid any extra remuneration for the said period.