SABERBIBI SHAIKH GULAM GADIWALA Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has inter alia challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and award dated 27th January, 2012 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Surat in Reference (IT) No.101 of 1998, whereby the Industrial Tribunal rejected the Reference of the petitioner as well as the order dated 13th September, 2012 passed by the respondent- Corporation terminating the services of the petitioner.

(2.) THE matrix of the facts as culled out from the case is that the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Industrial Tribunal inter alia stating that she was appointed as an Honorary Assistant Librarian since 09 th October, 1980. She also stated therein that she had applied for the post of Assistant Librarian and she was interviewed by the State Selection Committee and, therefore, she may be termed as being appointed on the post of Assistant Librarian and thereby, she may be given the pay-scale fixed by the respondent- Corporation from time to time vide different Resolutions. The dispute was numbered as Reference (IT) No.101 of 1998 and it was decided by way of the impugned judgment and award. After passing of the impugned judgment and award, the respondent- Municipality terminated the services of the petitioner vide communication dated 13th September, 2012. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petition has been preferred.

(3.) HAVING considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the respective parties and the documentary evidence produced on record as well as the averments made in the petition, it transpires that the present writ petition raises the following main question for consideration of this Court : (a) Whether a person who is engaged on honorarium can be termed as a workman ?