Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) -Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS writ petition is preferred by the petitioners for quashing the award in Adjudication Case Nos. 170 of 85, 172 of 85, 174 of 85 and 244 of 85 passed by the labour court in leading Adjudication Case No. 172 of 85, Charan Singh and others v. Modi Rubber Ltd. By the impugned award the labour court has answered the reference against the workmen and has held that the action of the employers in terminating the services of the petitioners from the posts of drivers as is given in the reference was according to the rules, legal and justified and they are not entitled to any relief or benefit. M/s. Modi Rubber Ltd., Modinagar, Ghaziabad (respondent No. 1) has its factory at Modipuram, Meerut, which is engaged in the manufacture of tyres for trucks, trolleys, cars, scooters, etc. At the relevant time it employed more than 3,000 workmen in its factory at Modipuram.
(3.) THE petitioners were drivers. It is alleged that they were not paid overtime for extra work done by them and therefore they wanted to form an association. A letter dated 16.8.1994 terminating the services of all the concerned workmen was issued by Sri J. L. Kaul, P.A. to the Vice President of the Company on his behalf. One of the orders terminating the services of the concerned workmen is reproduced below for appreciation of the controversy involved in the writ petition : "Modi Rubber Limited Date 16.8.84 Mr. Charan Singh, Driver, Transport Department. THE Management as a matter of policy of launching an economy drive and rationalizing overhead expenditure to let the industry remain economically viable............................ ................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................... You will be paid one-month's wages in lieu of notice and the retrenchment compensation along with your other dues as per the law. You are, therefore, required to collect one month's wages in lieu of notice and your dues payable to you in accordance with the law in full and final settlement of your account from the cash office before 5.00 p.m. on or before 21.8.1984. for Modi Rubber Limited Sd. J. L. Kaul for and on behalf of Vice Chairman & Managing Director Modi Rubber Limited" A notice dated 4.9.1984 was sent by one of the petitioners, namely, Subhash Chandra through his advocate addressed to the Vice-Chairman and Managing Director Modi Rubber Ltd. inter alia alleging that the workmen though shown as a probationer was in fact a permanent employee whose services had been terminated vide letter dated 17.8.1984 issued by Sri J. L. Kaul on behalf of the Vice-Chairman and Managing Director on fabricated and false grounds. It was also averred in para 6 of the notice : "6. That your entire acts is/are illegal, unjustified and your have terminated the services of my client only to victimize him due to his trade union activities. Shri J. L. Kaul has no authority to terminate the services of my client or to sign on your behalf the letter dated 17.8.1984. Therefore, through this notice I hereby call upon you to withdraw your letter dated 17.8.1984 and take him back on duty as driver with continuity of service and with all benefits within seven days from receipt of this notice, failing which my client shall take legal recourse against you at your risk, costs and consequences. Sd. Sudhir Johri Advocate";