N KUMARESAN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-N.Kumaresan (Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.12374 of 1994) was initially appointed as Supervisor on 1.1.1974 in the second respondent-South India Viscose Limited, Coimbatore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') and subsequently, he was appointed as Junior Engineer on 1.4.1974. According to the appellant, as his wife underwent a major operation, he applied for leave, vide letter dated 13.8.1983 for the period from 5.8.1983 to 15.9.1983, which was sanctioned by the Company. By a subsequent letter dated 14.9.1983, he requested the Company to extend the leave for another one month. It further appears that subsequently, the appellant did not join the Company on the ground that he was suffering from Jaundice. He applied for Medical Leave, which was extended from time to time, but finally, his services were terminated by the letter dated 12.2.1985 of the Company, accompanying a Demand Draft dated 12.2.1985 for a sum of Rs.1,906/-. THE appellant refused to accept the order of termination and the Demand Draft and finally, he moved before the first respondent-Labour Court, Coimbatore in I.D.No.433 of 1990. THE Labour Court, by its Award dated 23.4.1993, held that the appellant does not fall within the definition of 'workman' as defined under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, a sum of Rs.25,000/- was granted in favour of the appellant as "Ex-gratia". While the Company preferred Writ Petition No.15898 of 1994 challenging the Award of the Labour Court, dated 23.4.1993, in regard to payment of Ex-gratia amount, the appellant preferred W.P.No.12374 of 1994 as the order of termination passed by the Company had not been declared illegal by the Labour Court. Both these Writ Petitions were disposed of by a common order dated 25.10.2000 passed by the learned single Judge, giving rise to the present Writ Appeals.

(2.) THE learned single Judge, by the impugned order dated 25.10.2000, while dismissing W.P.No.12374 of 1994 preferred by the appellant, holding that the finding of the Labour Court relating to the appellant that he is not a 'workman', is incorrect, allowed W.P.No.15898 of 1994 preferred by the Company, holding that the Award regarding payment of Rs.25,000/- by way of Ex-gratia is unjustified.

(3.) ON behalf of the Official Liquidator, it was submitted that the order of winding up of the second respondent-Company having been passed, the appellant cannot be reinstated at this stage.