PRALHAD RAGHUNATH SHIMPI Vs. COLOUR-CHEM LIMITED, DR. D.S. VAIDYA, GENERAL MANAGER, COLOUR-CHEM LIMITED, SHRI V.V. GAONKAR, ASSTT. PERSONNEL MANAGER, COLOUR-CHEM LIMITED AND SHRI P.J. SHAH, PRESIDING OFFICER, 3RD LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision is arising out of the order passed by the Presiding Officer of the IIIrd Labour Court, Thane, on 10th February 1994, below application Exh. U. 2. The Learned Judge of the Trial Court has rejected the interim relief application, filed by the Complainant, Pralhad Raghunath Shimpi. The facts giving rise to the complaint can be briefly stated as under: - -

(2.) ON 1st November 1991 Respondent closed their M.P.D. Plant where the Complainant was working and thereafter he was transferred to Pigment Plant Department. Then the harassment to the Complainant started. On 14th May 1992 there was some error made by the helper, who was working with the Complainant. There was no loss and damage to the company, inspite of this Complainant was called by Shri Arora and also by the IInd Respondent and asked him to give resignation. He was also told to search another job and in the meantime he should proceed on the leave. As no alternative left, he proceeded on leave from 25th May 1992. When his privilege leave was exhausted, he went to resume duties, he was again asked to proceed on leave. Therefore, he proceeded on sick leave from 2nd June 1992 to 18th June 1992. Then again he was asked to proceed on privilege leave, so he proceeded on leave till 23rd July 1992. Again at the instance of Respondent, he proceeded on sick leave till 14th September 1992.

(3.) THE Complainant, has, therefore, stated that pressurise tactics are adopted by the Respondent. In order to terminate the services or to submit resignation. He has, thereafter categorically stated with respect of the various acts committed by the Respondents by which unfair labour practice is alleged.