SRI GURU RAM DAS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND RESEARCH Vs. P.O. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALPUNJAB AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of Civil Writ Petitions No. 2417, 2432 and 2468 of 2003 as common questions of law and facts have arisen for consideration in these cases. For the sake of brevity, facts are taken from CWP No. 2432 of 2003.

(2.) THE challenge herein lies to an order dated February 6, 2002 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Punjab by invoking its power under Section 33 -A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as the Act). The learned Tribunal held that termination of services of the workman (Respondent No. 2), being violative of Section 33 of the Act, cannot sustain and has directed the Petitioner -management to take the workman back on duty, with all consequential benefits.

(3.) UPON notice, written statement has been filed on behalf of the workman (Respondent No. 2), inter alia, pleading that the Petitioner - -Institute was originally established by Shiromani Gurudwara Parbandhak Committee which is a statutory body under the provisions of Sikh Gurudwara Act, 1925; the name of the Hospital was changed in the year 1980 and a trust was created to manage the affairs of the hospital; the Institute is approved by the Medical Council of India. It was originally affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar but presently it is affiliated to Baba Farid University of Health and Sciences, Faridkot; there are more than 700 ! workmen employed in the Institute and they have formed a union known as Medical Employees Association (Regd.)? The union raised an industrial dispute to the learned Labour Court for adjudication under Section 10(l)(d) of the Act. Respondent -workman had been a Cashier as well as an active worker of the union; he along with his co -workers raised the demand for regularisation of their services and granting them facilities like grade etc. as were being paid to ! the regular employees; however, in order to victimize and isolate ! the office bearers and active members of the Association and also with a view to discourage other members from pursuing the pending reference, the Petitioner -management terminated the services of its President, General Secretary and one active member of the union; Respondent No. 2 was one of them; since the services were terminated during the pendency of the reference which related to their service conditions and other benefits, an application under Section 33 -A of the Act was moved; that on November 20, 1999, the Petitioner -management had passed a resolution to regularise services of those ad hoc employees who had worked for more than 2 years yet instead of regularising services of Respondent No. 2, the same were dispensed with; the misconduct on the basis of which his services were terminated was directly connected with the pending dispute; that the order terminating his services was stigmatic in nature and the same having been passed without holding an inquiry as also without seeking prior approval of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, the same has rightly been set aside, - -vide the impugned award.