- (1.) THESE two writ petitions are filed by the Management, Gobichettipalayam Agri producers Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd represented by its Special Officer as well as by one K.A.Arangarasu, former President of the said Society challenging the award in I.D.No.314 of 2001 dated 05.02.2007 passed by the Labour Court, Salem.
(2.) BY the impugned award, the Labour Court directed the reinstatement of the contesting respondent G.K.Pachiappan with service continuity, backwages and other attendant benefits in the post of Watchman together with compensation of Rs.5,000/- to be paid by the Management. The Labour Court also in the impugned award gave liberty to recover the amount from the past President K.A.Arangarasu after taking appropriate proceedings in terms of the Act. It also ordered costs of Rs.300/- to be paid. W.P.No.28854/2007 filed by the Society was admitted on 03.09.2007. Pending the writ petition, an interim stay of the award was granted. Subsequently, the Ex-President of the Society, who was also shown as second respondent in the I.D., filed W.P.No.30409/2007 challenging that portion of the award, which enabled the society to recover the entire liability arising out of the Award. In that writ petition, notice regarding admission was ordered on 18.09.2007. Pending notice regarding admission, interim stay was granted with liberty to the respondent to vacate the stay. Thereafter, the writ petition was admitted on 05.10.2010 and interim stay granted already was made absolute in M.P.No.1 of 2007. The contesting respondent has not filed any application to vacate the interim order. However, when the matter came up on 24.01.2012, this Court in order to find out whether the allegation of the workman that at the time when he was dismissed, there was conciliation proceedings pending before Conciliation Officer and there was no approval of the said officer was obtained in terms of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was true or not, this Court directed the records to be produced. Accordingly, original records from the Society relating to the dispute was produced and was also perused by this Court. The facts arising out of the dispute are as follows:- The contesting respondent G.K.Pachiappan was appointed as a Driver of the lorry owned by the Society. K.A.Arangarasu got elected as President for the Board of Directors with effect from 01.11.1996. According to the society, the contesting respondent had unauthorisedly carried 25 passengers in the lorry owned by the Society. The said lorry was intercepted by the Road Transport Officer, Gobichettipalayam and initiated legal proceedings. On 26.10.1998, the R.T.O., Gobichettipalayam issued memo to the Society for using the lorry other than the purpose granted in the permit. This incident resulted in issuing charge memo dated 27.11.1998 to the contesting respondent G.K.Pachiappan. The said workman gave explanation on 7.12.1998. As the explanation was not satisfactory, enquiry was ordered. The enquiry officer found the workman guilty. Based upon the enquiry report, a second show cause notice was issued on 16.03.1999. Considering the misconduct, a punishment of increment cut for three years with cumulative effect was imposed against the workman by order dated 14.08.1999. It is claimed by the Society that out of two lorries owned by them, one lorry was sold away and there has been one lorry and the same has been driven by one driver, therefore, service of G.K.Pachiappan was not needed at that time. Hence, he was posted as Watchman and was transferred to Erode Branch Society by proceedings dated 17.08.1999.
(3.) THE workman joined duty as watchman on 18.08.1999 and worked two days and applied to go on medical leave, which was not sanctioned by the Society. However, the workman did not report for duty despite a reminder was sent to him. On 23.11.1999, the workman was placed under suspension pending an enquiry. At this stage, the trade union viz., Socialist Employees Union (Registration No.387/CBE) raised an industrial dispute under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Government Labour Officer, Erode. THE union placed a charter of demands containing nine demands. Demand Nos.1, 2 and 3 related to the workman concerned in this writ petition. THE Union demanded cancellation of the penalty imposed on the workman viz., the penalty by way of three increments cut with cumulative effect, reduction in rank from the post of driver to that of the a watchman was protested. THEy also demanded revocation of suspension and also demanded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. Besides these demands, there were other demands regarding the workmen viz., Murugesan and Sudanthiranathan. The notified Conciliation Officer by his proceedings No.514/2000 issued notice dated 05.05.2000 to the Society asking to appear with relevant records. Subsequently, the matter was posted on 24.05.2000. The Management of the society viz., K.A.Arangarasu sent a letter to the Conciliation Officer that due to administrative reasons, they could not appear on the date of the meeting. Thereafter, they have also authorised G.P.Meenakshi Sundaram, Superintendent to represent the Society. Authorisation was also given in favour of the Secretary. The society gave reply on 26.07.2000 before the conciliation officer. The conciliation officer fixed a final date for conciliation on 20.03.2000 vide memo dated 14.03.2000 and informed the parties that he was likely to send a failure report under Section 12(4) to the State Government.;