SRI TRILOCHAN PATTANAYAK Vs. THE FOURTH INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application challenges an award dated 15th March 2011 passed by the learned Judge, Fourth Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata. The cause of grievance of the writ petitioner is that the Tribunal held that he was not a workman of M/s. Champdani Industries Limited (the company), the third respondent. The Tribunal also held that the management had rightly terminated his services.

(2.) Let us examine the first issue.

(3.) On or about 7th Dec. 1991 the writ petitioner worked in Wellington Jute Mill, Rishra, Hooghly as an apprentice. Mr. Majumder states that this mill was part of the establishment of the company. After having undergone this period of apprenticeship on 17th Aug. 1992, he was appointed as an Electrical Supervisor in the works of the company in Kaikhali Crossing at VIP Road at a salary of Rs. 800.00 (basic+DA) and house rent and travelling allowance of Rs. 300.00 and Rs. 200.00 respectively. He was to be on probation for a period of six months. Clause 4 of the appointment letter is very important. It says, "you will remain as a full-time employee of the company" during the period of this appointment. On 29th Oct. 1994, by a letter the company confirmed the writ petitioner's appointment as an Electrical Supervisor with effect from 1st Nov. 1994 for a period of three years. I am told that this period of service was extended by the company from time to time till Nov., 1998. On 21st Nov. 1998 the writ petitioner received a letter from them that his service was terminated with effect from that afternoon. He would, however, be paid one month's salary in lieu of notice.