STP LTD Vs. LEARNED SECOND LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal was taken up for hearing on september 19, 2007. In course of hearing, it was submitted before us by the learned advocate, appearing for the Company/appellant that the concerned workman viz. , Ananda Das, after his service was terminated, worked in another company, viz. , Universal Surface Protection pvt. Ltd. No. 2, Brite Street, Ground Floor, kolkata. So in view of the provisions laid down in the proviso to Section 17-B of the Industrial disputes Act, the concerned workman is not entitled to get any arrears salary, as it was directed by the Learned Judge, Second Labour court. It was submitted by the learned advocate for the concerned workman that the respondent workman after his service was terminated never worked in any other concern and he was out of employment during that period and as such he is entitled to get relief under Section 17-B of the industrial Disputes Act. It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the respondent workman that the person named Ananda Das, who worked in Universal Surface Protection pvt, Ltd. was a different person in the same name. To ascertain this position we sent the matter to the Officer-in-Charge of Kataya police Station to enquire into the matter and to ascertain as to whether the concerned workman ananda Das, who worked in Universal Surface protection Pvt. Ltd. and whose signatures were appearing in the salary sheet of the said company is the same person who worked in the appellant Company viz. , STP Ltd.

(2.) PURSUANT to our earlier direction, a report is submitted before us by the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned Police Station, from which it appears that Ananda Das, the concerned workman was never an employee of universal Surface Protection Pvt. Ltd. , after his service was terminated from the appellant company viz. , STP Ltd. The report clearly indicates that the workman Ananda Das was out of employment after his service was terminated from STP Ltd. The learned advocate appearing for the appellant Company submitted that the report submitted by the Police Authority is not clear and specific, and as such the matter should be sent back again to the concerned Police station for giving a specific Report about the said Ananda Das, who worked in the Universal surface Protection Pvt. Ltd. But we are enable to accept such contention as we find that the report submitted by the Police is very specific and it is not at all necessary to send it again for any further enquiry.

(3.) THE proviso to Section 17-B of the industrial Disputes Act reads as follows: