PREMIER TYRES LIMITED Vs. V A ABRAHAM
LAWS(KER)-1974-7-18
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on July 19,1974

PREMIER TYRES LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
V A ABRAHAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) AN award of the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut in respect of the dispute between the Management of the Premier Tyres Limited, Kalamasseri and their workman Shri V. A. Abraham has given rise to these two original petitions. By the said award marked as Ext. P1 in both the petitions, the Tribunal found that the service of the workman concerned has been terminated by the management illegally and improperly. The Tribunal held that though ordinarily the workman would have been entitled to reinstatement, in consideration of the fact that the person concerned worked as the head of the security department and as the management's contentions would indicate that the relationship between the management and the workman had become strained, the Tribunal thought it was just and proper in this case to order the management only to pay two months wages for each completed year of service or any part thereof in excess of six months. This was by way of substantial compensation in lieu of reinstatement. As the Tribunal had held that the termination was affected illegally and improperly the workman was held entitled to wages from date of termination till the date of the award. He was also held entitled to gratuity taking his whole service as ending with the date of the award.
(2.) QUESTIONING this award, the management has filed O. P. 1652 of 1973 while the workman concerned has come up to this Court in O. P. 1971 of 1973 impugning the award in so far as it refuses him the relief of reinstatement in service.
(3.) THE industrial dispute arose in the following circumstances. The management of the Premier Tyres Ltd. (hereinafter called the petitioner on the basis of the array of parties in O. P. 1652 of 1973) appointed Shri V. A. Abraham (hereinafter referred to as the first respondent) as Security Inspector by order, dated 18-8-1964. The appointment was for a period of six months originally. The appointment was termed a trial appointment, the petitioner reserving to themselves the right to terminate the first respondent's appointment at any time forthwith, on payment to him of any salary/wages accrued to the date of termination. They were not bound to give him notices of termination of service or any salary in lieu, of such notice. After the trial period of six months, if the first respondent's work and conduct during the period was found to be satisfactory, his appointment was to be confirmed. As per the conditions of his service after confirmation also, for infringement of any rule or any misconduct, negligence or disobedience of orders of his superiors he was liable to instant and summary dismissal without any notice or salary in lieu of notice. It was also provided that even otherwise the petitioner shall have the right to dispense with his services, at any time without assigning any reason or giving a month's notice in writing or salary in lieu of such notice. The first respondent's designation was changed as security officer with effect from 31-11968.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.