THONGRAM HARIDAS SINGH, M/S ASHA CINEMA Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE decision rendered in this writ petition shall govern the disposal of the other connected writ petition being W.P.(C) No.790 of 2004 because in both these writ petitions common questions of law are involved as stated by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and therefore, they can be disposed of by one common order.

(2.) BY filing this writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the writ petitioner (employer) seeks to challenge the order/certificate issued by the appropriate Government under Section 33 (C) (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act (For short hereinafter called the Act) dt. 9.9.2004 (Annexure -E) for recovery of Rs. 3,43,498/ - towards payment of retrenchment compensation payable to respondent Nos. 3 to 19 (workers/employees).

(3.) THE writ petitioner is the owner of one Cinema Theatre known as "M/s Asha Cinema "at Imphal. The respondent nos 3 to 19 were working in this theatre on different posts at all relevant time as writ petitioner's employees. Since the writ petitioner claimed to have suffered losses in running the Cinema business and hence he closed the Cinema business in January 2002. The respondent nos. 3 to 19 thereupon filed an application dt 28.11.2002 to the appropriate Government under Section 33 (c) (1) of the Act and claimed payment of retrenchment compensation in accordance with the provisions of Section 25 F of the Act from the writ petitioner (employer) which was payable to them due to abrupt termination of their services under Section 25 F of the Act. The appropriate Government referred the matter to Labour Commissioner for holding the inquiry as provided in Section 33 (C) (1) ibid. The Labour Commissioner then called upon the writ petitioner (employer) to file the reply to the application made by the respondent nos. 3 to 9. The writ petitioner filed a reply contending inter -alia that since the respondent nos. 3 to 19 had voluntarily resigned or/and retired from the services and secondly, the writ petitioner having paid all their dues including P.F etc, till the date of their discontinuance, he is not liable to pay any retrenchment compensation to these workers.