DESOUZA ISHED PEDRU Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ or direction to the respondents, respondents I and 2 to refer the dispute relating to termination of his services as Pharmacist of Durrung Tea Estate for adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed Pharmacist on probation for a period of six months vide Annexure-B letter dated 1.2.90 by the Respondent No, 5. Thereafter, by Annexure -D letter dated 30.7,90 issued by the Manager of Respondent No. 5 Company, the services of the petitioner were terminated with effect from 1.8,90 as be was not considered suitable for confirmation in the said post. By Annexure-C letter dated 16.8,90 his service was confirmed as. a permanent employee and he was asked 10 resume Ms duties immediately. But, subsequently by Annexure-E letter dated 15.9.90 the Management revoked the letter dated 16.8.90 and informed the petitioner Chat the letter dated 30.7.90 would continue to remain in force, thereby terminating the services of the petitioner with retrospective effect from 1.8.90. Thereafter, the petitioner raised a dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Tezpur. Meanwhile, the Management (Respondent No. 5) Filed a suit (Title Suit No. 3/91) before the Assistant District Judge, Tezpur for eviction of the petitioner from the quarter. The petitioner contested the suit by filing written statement and thereafter, the learned Asstt. District Judge, Tezpur after hearing, the parties stayed further proceedings of the said suit in view of the provisions of the Plantation and Labour Act and Rules framed thereunder and also under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order passed in the title suit, the Respondent No. 5 as petitioner filed a revision (Civil Revision No. 244/93) before this Court. This Court after hearing the parties disposed of the said civil revision holding that the Court below rightly stayed further proceedings of the title suit.