LAWS(APH)-1985-5-2

COROMANDAL FERTILIZERS LIMITED Vs. P VENUGOPAL

Decided On May 05, 1985
COROMANDAL FERTILIZERS LTD. Appellant
V/S
P.VENUGOPAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P. No. 11548/84 : This writ petition is directed against the award made by the Labour Court, Guntur, directing reinstatement of the 1st respondent (workman) with continuity of service, and with all back wages and other attendant benefits. The management has preferred this writ petition.

(2.) The 1st respondent-workman joined the Petitioner-company, Coromandal Fertilisers Ltd., Visakhapatnam, in 1967 as a Trainee Technician. In Course of time, he attained the position of a Shift Engineer. While working in the said post, the 1st respondent was selected by the National Petro-Chemicals, Libya, for appointment on a Salary of US dollars 1230 month. On receiving the said offer of appointment, the 1st respondent says he submitted a letter of resignation on 17/10/1981, giving one months notice to the Management in terms of his appointment order. According to him, he requested the management to accept his resignation with effect from 16/11/1981 but to relieve him with effect from 12/11/1981, with a view to enable him to proceed to Libya in time to join the post there. He also requested the management to issue him the necessary Service Certificate as was being issued to other similarly placed employees. His further case is that the management, with a view to victimize him for his Union activities, accepted his resignation forthwith i.e. with effect from 20/10/1981 and also refused to issue the service-certificate, while issuing such a certificate in the case of another similarly placed person, one Sri Varma. The 1st respondents further case is that, he went to Libya but, because he was not able to produce the service-certificate from Coromandal Fertilisers Ltd., (his Indian employer) he was not posted in the post for which he was selected by the Libyan Company; that, he was made to work in a lower and menial post, kept under police survelliance suspecting him to be a spy and, after a period of six months, repatriated to India. He says that, he suffered great humilitation and hunger in Libya, and all because of the refusal of the petitioner-management to issue the necessary service-certificate. Ultimately, however, the Libyan authorities realized that he is not a spy; but, refused to employ him and sent him away from their Country, paying him damages in a sum of US Dollars 11,360. After returning to India, the 1st respondent raised a dispute which was ultimately referred by the Government to the Labour Court. The issue referred to the Labour Court was :

(3.) The 1st respondents case is that, the action of the management (Writ Petitioner) in accepting his resignation with effect from 20/10/1981 is contrary to his resignation letter and, therefore, amounts to termination of his service, the termination is not only contrary to the order of appointment but is also contrary to the provisions of the Industrial Disputes act, it amounts to retrenchment, as defined by Clause (oo) in S. 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act. He also complains of discrimination and victimisation on the part of the management, in as much as, while issuing service-certificate to other similarly placed employees, it was refused to him, which was really the cause for all his suffering and humiliation in Libya. He claimed reinstatement and back wages for the entire period with attendant benefits.