LAWS(P&H)-2010-8-3

DEVINDER KAUR Vs. CHILD WELFARE COUNCIL

Decided On August 26, 2010
DEVINDER KAUR Appellant
V/S
CHILD WELFARE COUNCIL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Smt. Devinder Kaur was appointed as Balsewika to run a Creche by the Child Welfare Council working under the Indian Red Cross, Society, Bathinda in the pay scale of Rs. 950-25-1200-30-1560-40-1800/- alongwith permissible allowances on 19.9.1994. Initially, salary of the petitioner was fixed at Rs. 2,824/- p.m. The order of appointment has been annexed as Annexure P1. On 18.1.1994, she was terminated from service on the ground that her services were no longer required as the Child Welfare Council, Punjab (hereinafter to be referred as, 'the Council') had decided to close the Creche. Petitioner made a reference under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The termination of the petitioner was upheld by the Labour Court. An award to this effect was pronounced on 18.12.1997. However, the petitioner was held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 22,592/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of termination. Later, the Council made certain efforts to adjust the petitioner vide office order dated 30.12.1996, Annexure P2. In this order, it was specifically stated that under the schematic pattern of Indian Council of Child Welfare, New Delhi and adopted by the Council, the petitioner may work as a Balsewika at Rs. 525/- p.m. payable as honorarium. However, on 22.2.1999 vide Annexure P3, due to closure of this Creche of the Council, also the honorary services rendered by the petitioner as Balsewika (Senior Helper) were dispensed with. The concluding portion of the office order, Annexure P3, reads as under:

(2.) The above-said order, Annexure P3, passed by the President, Red Cross Society, Bathinda is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) In the reply filed, a preliminary objection has been raised that District Child Welfare Council is not amenable to writ jurisdiction and cannot be termed as State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It is admitted that services of the petitioner were dispensed with and one month honorarium was paid in advance as there was financial crunch in the Council which led to closure of the Creche.