SONEPAT COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD Vs. DAYA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the award passed by the Labour Court in Reference No. 41 of 1979 dated 4. 4. 1981.

(2.) THE respondent Daya Singh Malik was appointed on 6. 12. 1976 as Provident Fund Clerk in the petitioner Sugar Mills. His services were terminated on 16. 8. 1977 on the ground that the post of Provident Fund Clerk was abolished. Thereupon the workman raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. The Labour Court held that the management violated the provisions of Sections 25 (c) and 25 (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act and therefore directed his reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service, Aggrieved by the said award, the management preferred this writ petition.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the workman argued that subsequently on the introduction of the Provident Fund Scheme, a post of Provident Fund Clerk was created and some other person was employed for the same. Therefore the provisions of Section 25 (C) and 25 (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act are attracted. But it is not the case of a retrenchment and the services of the workman were terminated only because of the abolition of the post created for the purpose of compulsory deductions under the Compulsory Deposit Act. If another post though with the same designation, was created later, the workman is not entitled to claim that he should be appointed against that post which has been newly created. In fact, the new post was created only after the reference was made to the Labour Court. The Labour Court had to see whether the termination of the services of the workman was justified and in order. There is no question of application of principles' first come last go: when the post is created for a different purpose, there was no obligation on the part of the management to offer the said post to the workman. I am, therefore, of the opinion, that the order of the Labour Court is liable to be set aside.