G.S. Sandhawalia, J. - (1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed for quashing the award dated 08.12.2009 (Annexure P7), passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak, whereby, respondent No. 2 was reinstated in service on his previous post, with continuity of service and 30% back wages, from the date of the demand notice, i.e., 30.07.2002 (Annexure P1). A perusal of the paperbook would go on to show that respondent No. 2 -workman took the plea that he had been appointed on 29.08.1999 as Junior Engineer (Electrical) and was getting Rs. 3200/ - per month as salary and he worked upto 18.07.2002. His services were terminated without issuing any show cause notice and without assigning any reason and the mandatory provisions were not adhered to under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the 'Act'). On the dispute being referred, claim statement was filed before the Labour Court on the same set of allegations and in reply, the petitioner -Management took the plea that he was not a workman as he has been serving as Junior Engineer (Electrical) and was working as supervisory officer over the junior Electricians and thus, the jurisdiction of the Labour Court itself was under challenge. By replication, the workman claimed that he fell under the definition given under Section 2(s) of the Act and was not working in the capacity of supervisory officer. On merits, the Management took the plea that it was a case of absence as he did not rejoined his duty despite being informed.
(2.) THE Labour, Court framed the following issues: "(1) As per terms of reference? (2) Whether the applicant was not a workman? (3) Relief." Thereafter, the petitioner examined Shri K.S. Yadav, General Manager, S.B. Packaging as MW 1 and the workman appeared as WW 1. The Labour Court recorded a finding that there was nothing on record to show that he had left duty after 18.07.2002 or absented himself and no attendance register or document has been placed on the file, though the Management was claiming that the workman was working as Junior Engineer but the document dated 10.03.2003 (Mark 'A') was rejected on the ground that it was not proved in accordance with law and pertained to some other person, namely, Manjeet Singh, son of Satvir Singh. The claim of the Management that there was no document to show that the workman was appointed on a supervisory capacity and he was verbally appointed as no appointment letter was issued to him, was taken into account. It was further noticed that the Management witness has deposed that he cannot produce any document to show that he was appointed in supervisory capacity or that he had power to grant leave to other workers though he had stated that 2 -3 persons were working under the workman. Accordingly, it was held that the nature of duties of the workman were only of a worker and he had no administrative powers and he could not be denied the benefit of the workman under the Act. Resultantly, reinstatement was ordered along with 30% back wages, from the date of the demand notice dated 30.07.2002.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has argued that vide CM No. 11196 of 2010 (Annexure P8) for placing on record the additional evidence, appointment letter dated 29.08.1999 has been placed on record in which it has been mentioned that respondent No. 2 had power to suspend the services of subordinate staff and initiate inquiry against them and he had workers working under him whose number may increase or decrease. In the application, it was averred that the petitioner had inadvertently not produced the record before the Labour Court and that it is necessary for the proper adjudication of the case. The said application was allowed on 25.07.2013 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and the following order was passed: "CM No. 11196 of 2010 Learned counsel for, respondent No. 2 submits that he does not intend to file any reply to CM No. 11196 of 2010 and he will argue the main case because he has already filed the written statement to the writ petition. In view of the above, the present application is allowed. Annexure P -8 is permitted to be placed on record. CM stands disposed of.";