SONEPAT CENTRAL CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ROHTAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can an Advocate/Legal Advisor be a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act to approach Labour Court against his alleged termination? This question arises in the writ petition.

(2.) The Sonepat Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. has filed this writ petition to impugn award passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak whereby the respondent-Advocate has been held to be an employee of the petitioner-Bank.

(3.) As per the averment made in the petition, respondent No.2 was practicing Advocate at District courts, Sonepat and he was appointed as Legal Advisor of the petitioner-bank for conducting the cases of Sonepat Sub Division and Gohana Sub Division by the Board of Directors on 08.10.1979. Prior fo the appointment of respondent No. 2, Sh. Umesh Chulkana and Sh. Dhajja Ram were working as Legal Advisor of the Bank. Since they were not performing their duties well, they were removed and in their place respondent No.2 was appointed. As per the terms and conditions of respondent No. 2, his remuneration was initially fixed at Rs. 220 and was enhanced to Rs. 330/- per month by the Board of Directors. It is, accordingly, pleaded that he was an Advocate and not an employee of the petitioner-Bank and his sole function was to attend the court cases and to give legal advice as and when required by the Bank.