SUNIL KUMAR GHOSE Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was employed as the Office Secretary of the Cuttack Chamber of Commerce. He filed an application under section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') claiming certain service benefits. The Management filed an objection contending that the petitioner was not a workman within the definition of section 2 (s) of the Act in as much as he was employed mainly in a managerial capacity. Evidence was led on both sides and the Labour Court upheld the objection of the Management and negative the claim of the petitioner. This application for a writ of certiorari is directed against the order of the Labour court rejecting the claim under section 33-C (2) of the act.

(2.) IN this Court the Management has also filed a counter affidavit supporting the order of the Labour Court.

(3.) IT is not disputed by Mr. Patnaik for the petitioner that if the petitioner could not be a workman, the application under section 33-C (2) of the Act could not be maintainable. The definition of workman in section 2 (s), as far as relevant, runs thus