- (1.) THIS writ petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, impugns an order of the labour Court, Kolhapur, dated 31st March, 1982, made in complaint (ULP) No. 9 of 1977 as confirmed by the order of the Industrial Court, Kolhapur, dated 20th March, 1985, made in revision Application (ULP) No. 12 of 1982, Both proceedings were under the provisions of the maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).
(2.) THE first respondent is a Co-operative Society engaged in the business of manufacturing sugar at its factory situated at Phaltan, District Satara. The petitioner joined the services of the first respondent on 3. 11. 1958 as a Clerk and was thereafter promoted as Sectional Head with effect from 1. 11. 1969 by an order issued on 2-10. 1972. By an order issued on 11. 4. 1974, with effect from 1. 2. 1974, he was promoted as Transport Superintendent. On 19th February, 1977, the petitioner was served with an order terminating his services by which he was informed as under: "in pursuance of the Resolutions of Board of Directors No. 8 (1) dated 4th February 1977, we have every reason to believe that your continuance in the employment of the Karkhana is detrimental to the interest of the Karkhana. Your services are, therefore, terminated from 21,2,1977 after office hours in accordance with Section 21 of the Standing Order applicable to you. "
(3.) THE first respondent-Karkhana is governed by the provisions of the Bombay Industrial relations Act. Standing Orders, which govern Industrial Relations between the first respondent and its employees, have been settled in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of the bombay Industrial Relations Act. Standing Order 21 empowers the first respondent-employer to terminate the services of a permanent employee by giving him one month's notice or by payment of one month's wages in lieu of notice. It is, however, required under the Standing Order that an order of termination of employment shall be made in writing, signed by the Managing Director and a copy thereof shall be supplied to the employee at the time of discharge. It also requires that the reasons for termination of the employment shall be recorded in writing and be communicated to the employee at the time of discharge, unless such communication in the opinion of the managing Director, is likely directly or indirectly, to lay any person signing the communication open to criminal or civil proceedings at the instance of the employee. These Standing Orders also contain detailed provision defining misconduct and procedure to be followed for dismissal of an employee for misconduct. In the case of the petitioner, though the action was purported to have been taken under Standing Order 21, by way of what is popularly known as discharge simpliciter, the petitioner was neither served with a copy of the resolution of Board of Directors, nor was he served with the copy of the reasons required to be recorded according to Standing order 21 (2 ). Such reasons, as a matter of fact, do not appear to have been placed on the record of the Trial Court also.;