K RAJYALAXMI Vs. AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT AND REGIONAL ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR LABOUR VISAKHAPATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeal No. 891 of 1975 is directed against the order made by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 7017 of 1974. He confirmed the award of the Labour Court by his order.

(2.) The facts of the case briefly stated are as under: K.K. Motor Bus Service, The Rajyalakshmi Bus Service and The Kamalamma Bus Service had in their employment 15 workers. It appears that in 1970 the workmen were not given work. Therefore, they started agitating 1he dispute as to their wages. Conciliation proceedings were instituted. The management stated before the Conciliation Officer that they did not terminate the services of the 15 workmen though they were not given any work nor were they paid their wages.. The management had not actually terminated the services of the workmen by serving a notice upon them. However, for the first time in the conciliation proceedings the management stated that they has removed the names of the 15 workmen from the muster roll with effect from 17th December, 1970 because they had been -absent from duty for more than ten days. The conciliation proceedings failed and the Conciliation Officer reported accordingly to the Government. The Government found that there was an industrial dispute between the management and the workmen, and, therefore, referred it to the Labour Court, Guntnr, tmder the Industrial Disputes Act..

(3.) Before the Labour Court it was contended by the management that the services of the 15 workmen had not been terminated by them and that therefore the reference which was made was invalid because there was no industrial dispute between the parties. The contention which the workmen raised was that their services had teen terminated. The Labour Court recorded the conclusion that the reference was invalid because there was no industrial dispute as the workmen had not made a demand for reinstatement and the management had mot refused to accept it. The Labour Court also went into the question in the alternative of retrenchment compensation payable to these workmen and recorded its finding. Ultimately, the Labour Court rejected the reference on the ground that it was invalid and made its award accordingly.