- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is directed against order of the Governor making suo motu reference dated June 12, 2002 to Labour Court I U. P. Ghaziabad to decide that as to whether the action of the petitioner employer terminating the services of its 51 employees from different dates was valid or not. The names of employees and dates of termination of their services were mentioned in the Annexure to the referring order. The reference was made under Section 4-K of U. P. Industrial Disputes Act.
(2.) THE respondent No. 3 i. e. Engineering kamgar Union 234 Laljhanda Bahwan ambedkar Road, Ghaziabad through its secretary filed application on March 16. 2001 before Deputy Labour Commissioner, ghaziabad complaining that on March 16, 2001 the management did not permit the employees to join their duty. Thereafter, another application on April 16, 2001 was filed for payment of wages under U. P. Industrial Peace (Timely Payment of Wages) Act, 1978 complaining that workers whose names were given had not been paid their salary from March 2001. Union also wrote letters to D. M. , S. S. P. etc. complaining that lay off had been illegally declared by the petitioner-management. Against the application dated April 16, 2001 petitioner filed objections asserting that persons mentioned therein were not its employees.
(3.) ACCORDING to para 8 of the writ petition about half of the persons mentioned in the application dated April 16, 2001 gave affidavits in March, 2001. Affidavits were filed before deputy Labour Commissioner, Ghaziabad. It was further stated in the affidavits that these workers left their jobs with the petitioner prior to February, 2001. In para 10 of the writ petition, it has been stated that petitioner had not laid off any of its workers and respondent No. 3 Union had not been authorised by the alleged workers on whose behalf it was making complaints to espouse their cause. Thereafter, Deputy Labour commissioner, Ghaziabad issued a certificate on August 2, 2001 indicating therein that permanent employees had been laid off by the petitioner with effect from March 16, 2001, however, the matter had been resolved partially with effect from July 6, 2001 and some workers had resumed the duties.;