MARY MENDES Vs. LYTTON HOTEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated April 4, 2000 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 145 of 2000, whereby and whereundcr the writ petition filed by the respondent herein had been allowed. However, as against certain findings the writ petitioner/ responcnt has also filed a cross-objection.

(2.) The appellant herein, was an employee working in the respondent's hotel. Her services were terminated on May 2, 1995. A reference was made by the Appropriate Government to the respondent Tribunal on November 16, 1995. An application for maintenance and interim relief in terms of Section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was filed by the appellant herein on January 22, 1997 after the parties had filed their respective written-statements. The said application was allowed by the learned Tribunal in terms of his order dated November 10, 1997 whereby and whereunder the respondent was directed to pay 50% of the salary of the appellant herein at the rate of Rs. 1800/- per month for the first three months from May 2, 1994 and thereafter 75 per cent of Rs. 1800/- per month with further direction that the current monthly sums of interim relief should be given by the respondent to the appellant within 10th day of each subsequent month in Court and the arrear sum of interim relief on calculation be paid to the appellant by the respondent in six equal monthly instalments.

(3.) On or about November 20, 1998 two witnesses were examined on behalf of the appellant. Witnesses on behalf of the respondents were also examined on March 11, 1999, April 8, 1999, April 16, 1999 and April 7, 1999. By an order dated July 7, 1999 the respondent was directed to pay atleast 50% of the total arrear amount of interim relief by August 3, 1999. But by order dated August 3, 1999 the respondent was directed to make payment of amount of arrears of interim relief uptp July 31, 1999 by August 20, 1999 in default whereof it was directed that the respondent would be debarred from taking part in the proceeding. Allegedly on the ground of non-payment of interim relief, by an order dated August 20, 1999 the question was directed to be heard ex parte. On or about August 20, 1999, the appellant agreed to pay the arrears at the rate of Rs. 7000/- per month. On September 8, 1999 they prayed for adjournment as they wanted to move this Court against the said order. But the said prayer was not only refused, but on that day the evidence was closed and the records were put up in the second half for disposal and on the next day, i.e. September 9, 1999, the impugned award was passed.