(1) (2) (3)
(4)
(5)
H. A. Ca.
Thiru/Tmt./Selvi :
15 9/7/1 Ryot Wet Salma Beevi, W/o. Jakkriya 0 07 15 16 9/7/2 Ryot Wet Amutha, W/o. Subramanian 0 05 35 17 9/8 Ryot Wet 1. Muhamadhu Natchiyal, W/o. Ahamadu Maricar; 0 03 50
2. Khathja Natchiyal, W/o. Abdul Khathar.
18 10/2 Ryot Wet Annal Girishdi, W/o. Yovan 0 49 50 19 10/3 Ryot Wet Present Trustee, Uthirapathi Swamy Temple, 0 34 00
Thiruchengatankudi.
20 10/4 Ryot Wet Present Trustee, Sadayupureeswarar Swamy 0 36 00
Temple, T. R. Pattinam.
21 10/5/2 Ryot Wet 1. Kalavathy, D/o. Panchatcharam; 0 42 37
2. Varalatchumy, D/o. Panchatcharam;
3. Vijayaletchumy, D/o. Panchatcharam;
4. Kalasalingam, S/o. Selvaraj;
5. Letchumy, W/o. Selvaraj.
Total . . 7 60 37
(By order of the Lieutenant-Governor)
G. RAGESH CHANDRA, Special Secretary to Government. GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY
BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KARAIKAL
LABOUR DEPARTMENT
Present : Tmt. R. MARGARET ROSALINE, M.L., (G. O. Rt. No. 15/AIL/Lab./J/2011, dated 28th January 2011)
Presiding Officer, Labour Court (District Judge), Karaikal.
NOTIFICATION
Tuesday, the 23rd day of November 2010
I.D. No. 2/2009
Tmt. C. Latha, W/o. Citrarasu, No. 34, Anthoniar Koil Street, Keezha Oduthurai, Karaikal. . . Petitioner Whereas, the Award in I.D. No. 2/2009, dated 23-11-2010 of the Labour Court, Karaikal in respect of the i n d u s t r i a l d i s p u t e b e t w e e n t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f M/s. Vinayaga Mission's Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal and Tmt. C. Latha, W/o. Citrarasu, Karaikal over non-employment has been received;
Versus
The Management, M/s. Vinayaga Mission's Medical College and Hospital, Keezhakasakudi Medu, Kottucherry, Karaikal.
. . Respondent 104 LA GAZETTE DE L'ETAT [15 February 2011 AWARD
BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KARAIKAL
This industrial dispute arises out of the reference made by the Government under section 10(1)(c)of the Industrial Disputes Act in G.O. Rt. No. 63/AIL/Lab./J/2009, dated 13-4-2009 in and by which the following references were made to this court for adjudication :
Present : Tmt. R. MARGARET ROSALINE., M.L., Presiding Officer, Labour Court (District Judge), Karaikal.
Tuesday, the 16th day of November 2010
I.D. No. 6/2005
Thiru K. Sandanam, No. 5, Perumal Koil Street, Nedungadu, Karaikal.
. . Petitioner
Versus
(a) Whether the dispute raised by Tmt. C. Latha, W/o. Citrarasu, No. 34, Anthoniar Koil Street, Keezha Oduthurai, Karaikal, against the management of M/s. Vinayaga Mission's Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal over non-employment is justified or not ?
(b) If justified, to what relief, the petitioner is entitled to ?
(c) To compute the relief, if any awarded in terms of money, if it can be so computed ?
2. Petitioner called absent. No claim statement filed.
Hence industrial dispute closed. No costs.
Written and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 23rd day of November, 2010.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE, Presiding Officer, Labour Court. Karaikal.
————
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY The Employer, M/s. Soundararaja Mills Limited, Nedungadu, Karaikal.
. . Respondent This case coming on 16-11-2010 in the presence of Thiru V. Govindasamy, advocate for the petitioner and Thiru R. Thimbiraj, advocate for the respondent and on hearing both sides, and on perusing the case records, this court passed the following :
AWARD
This industrial dispute arises out of the reference made by the Government under section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act in G.O. Rt. No. 174/2005/ Lab./AIL//J, dated 15-9-2005 in and by which the following references were made to this court for adjudication :
(a) Whether the non-employment of Thiru K. Sandanam by the management of M/s. Soundararaja Mills, Karaikal is justified or not?
LABOUR DEPARTMENT
(b) To what relief, the worker is entitled to?
(G. O. Rt. No. 16/AIL/Lab./J/2011, dated 28th January 2011)
NOTIFICATION
Whereas, the Award in I.D. No. 6/2005, dated 16-11-2010 of the Labour Court, Karaikal in respect o f t h e i n d u s t r i a l d i s p u t e b e t w e e n t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f M/s. Soundararaja Mills, Karaikal and Thiru K. Sandanam, over non-employment has been received;
(c) To compute the relief, if any awarded in terms of money, if it can be so computed ?
2. Memo. filed by petitioner stating that the matter has been settled out of court by receiving two cheques for ` 40,000 in lieu of re-employment and in full quit. Hence industrial dispute dismissed as not pressed. No costs.
Written and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16th day of November 2010.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE, Presiding Officer, Labour Court. Karaikal.
————
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY LABOUR DEPARTMENT
(G.O. Rt. No. 17/AIL/Lab./J/2011, dated 28th January 2011)
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947) read with t h e n o t i f i c a t i o n i s s u e d i n L a b o u r D e p a r t m e n t ' s G. O. Ms. No. 20/91/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991, it is hereby directed by Secretary to Government (Labour) that the said Award shall be published in the official gazette, Puducherry.
15 February 2011] LA GAZETTE DE L'ETAT 105N a r a y a n C o - o p . S p i n n i n g M i l l s , K a r a i k a l a n d Thiru S. Essouradjane over non - employment has been received;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947) read with the notification issued in Labour Department's G.O. Ms. No. 20/91/Lab./L, dated, 23-5-1991, it is hereby directed by Secretary to Government (Labour) that the said Award shall be published in the official gazette, Puducherry.
(By order)
G. MALAR KANNAN, Joint Secretary to Government (Labour).
————
(b) If not justified, to what relief, the workman is entitled to?
(c) To compute the relief, if any, awarded in terms of money, if it can be so computed?
2. Order passed. As the petitioner has proved his claim through Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7, the award is passed directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service from the date of this order. However there is no order as to back wages as the petitioner has not worked. No costs.
Written and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th day of November 2010.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE, Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Karaikal.
————
BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KARAIKAL
List of witnesses examined by the petitioner :
Present : Tmt. R. MARGARET ROSALINE., M.L., Presiding Officer, Labour Court (District Judge), Karaikal.
P.W.1 — Essuradjane
List of exhibits marked by the petitioner :
Saturday, the 20th day of November 2010
Ex.P. 1 — Memorandum, dated 10-5-1997 issued to the petitioner by the respondent company.
I.D. No. 13/2009
Thiru S. Essouradjane, No. 32, Madha Koil Street, Vadamattam, Nedungadu, Karaikal.
. . Petitioner Ex.P. 2 —Office order, dated 20-6-2000 issued to the petitioner by the respondent company.
Ex.P. 3 —Xerox copy of medical certificate.
Ex.P. 4 —Called for explanation from the petitioner,
Versus
The Management, M/s. Jayaprakash Narayan Co-op. Spinning Mills Limited, No. P. 545, Keezhamanai, Neravy, Karaikal.
. . Respondent This case coming on 20-11-2010 in the presence of Thiru N. Ramar for the petitioner, and the respondent being called absent and set ex parte, and on hearing the petitioner, and on perusing the case records, this court passed the following:
AWARD
dated 18-5-2007.
Ex.P. 5 —Termination order, dated 16-7-2007 Ex.P. 6 —Failure report, dated 17-8-2009.
Ex.P. 7 —Reference made by Labour Department, dated 12-10-2009.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE, Presiding Officer, Labour Court. Karaikal.
————
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY LABOUR DEPARTMENT
(G.O. Rt. No. 21/AIL/Lab./J/2011, dated 3rd February 2011)
This industrial dispute arises out of the reference made by the Government under section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act in G.O.Rt. No. 140/AIL/Lab/J/2009, dated 12-10-2009 in and by which the following references were made to this court for adjudication.
(a) Whether the termination of the services of T h i r u S . E s s o u r a d j a n e b y t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f M/s. Jayaprakash Narayan Co-op. Spinning Mills, Karaikal is justified or not ?
NOTIFICATION
Whereas, the Award in I.D. No. 4/2010, dated 19-10-2010 of the Labour Court, Karaikal in respect of the i n d u s t r i a l d i s p u t e b e t w e e n t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f M/s. Vinayaga Mission's Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal and Tmt. T. Minnalkodi, over non- employment has been received;
106 LA GAZETTE DE L'ETAT [15 February 2011Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947) read with t h e n o t i f i c a t i o n i s s u e d i n L a b o u r D e p a r t m e n t ' s G.O. Ms. No. 20/91/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991, it is hereby directed by Secretary to Government (Labour) that the said Award shall be published in the official gazette, Puducherry.
(By order)
(c) To compute the relief, if any awarded in terms of money, if it can be so computed ?
2. Petitioner called absent. No claim statement filed. No representation made. In spite of giving sufficient time, the petitioner has not chosen to file her claim statement. Hence the reference is closed.
Written and pronounced by me in the open court on this 19th day of October 2010.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE,
G. MALAR KANNAN,
Joint Secretary to Government (Labour).
————
Presiding Officer, Labour Court. Karaikal.
————
BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KARAIKAL
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY LABOUR DEPARTMENT
Present : Tmt. R. MARGARET ROSALINE, M.L., (G.O. Rt. No. 22/AIL/Lab./J/2011, dated 3rd February 2011) Presiding Officer, Labour Court, [Additional District Judge], Karaikal.
Tuesday, the 19th day of October 2010
NOTIFICATION
I.D. No. 4/2010
Tmt. T. Minnalkodi, No. 9, Pandaravadai, Kurumbagaram, Nedungadu, Karaikal. . . Petitioner W h e r e a s , t h e Aw a r d i n I . D . N o . 5 / 2 0 09, dated 20-10-2010 of the Labour Court, Karaikal in respect of the industrial dispute between the management of M / s . Ulaga Nayaki Amman Steels, Karaikal and Thiru R. Adaikalaraj, Karaikal over non-employment has been received;
Versus
The Management, M/s. Vinayaga Mission's Medical College and Hospital, Keezhakasakudi Medu, Kottucherry, Karaikal.
. . Respondent This case coming on 19-10-2010 hearing before the petitioner appeared in person and being called absent and Thiru R. Illanchelian, advocate for the respondent and on hearing him and upon perusing the case records, this court passed the following :
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947), read with the no t i f i c a t i o n i s s u e d i n L a b o u r D e p a r t m e n t ' s G.O. Ms.No.20/91/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991, it is hereby directed by Secretary to Government (Labour), that the said Award shall be published in the official gazette, Puducherry,
(By order)
G. MALAR KANNAN,
AWARD
Joint Secretary to Government (Labour).
————
BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KARAIKAL
This industrial dispute arises out of the reference made by the Government under section 10(1)(c)of the Industrial Disputes Act in G.O. Rt. No. 96/AIL/Lab./J/2010, dated 11-5-2010 in and by which the following references were made to this court for adjudication :
Present : Tmt. R. MARGARET ROSALINE, M.L., Presiding Officer, Labour Court, [Additional District Judge], Karaikal.
Wednesday, the 20th day of October 2010.
I.D. No. 5/2009
( a ) W h e t h e r t h e d i s p u t e r a i s e d b y T m t . T. Minnalkodi, against the management of M/s. Vinayaga Mission's Medical College and Hospital, Karaikal over non-employment is justified or not ?
(b) If justified, to what relief, the petitioner is entitled to ?
R. Adaikalaraj, No. 10/5, Valliammai Nagar, Lemaire Street, Karaikal.
. . Petitioner15 February 2011] LA GAZETTE DE L'ETAT 107
Versus
The Employer/Management, M/s. Ulaga Nayaki Amman Steels, Keezhavur, Thirunallar. . . Respondent directed by Secretary to Government (Labour), that the said Award shall be published in the official gazette, Puducherry.
(By order)
G. MALAR KANNAN, Joint Secretary to Government (Labour).
————
BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KARAIKAL
This case coming on 20-10-2010 for final hearing before me in the presence of Thiru V. Govindasamy, advocate for the petitioner and Thiru S. Suriyamoorthy, advocate for the respondent and upon hearing both sides, and perusing the case records, this court delivered the following :
AWARD
Present : Tmt. R. MARGARET ROSALINE, M.L., Presiding Officer, Labour Court [Additional District Judge], Karaikal.
Wednesday, the 27th day of October 2010
I.D. No. 6/2009
This industrial dispute arises out of the reference made by the Government under section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act in G.O. Rt. No. 80/AIL/Lab./J/2009, dated 3-6-2009 in and by which the following references were made to this court for adjudication.
R. Sekar, No. 10, Pidari Koil Street, Andiappan Thidal, Thirunallar. . . Petitioner
Versus
(1) Whether the dispute raised by Thiru R. Adaikalaraj, Karaikal against the management of M/s. Ulaga Nayaki Amman Steels, Karaikal over his non-employment is justified or not?
(2) If justified, to what relief, he is entitled to?
(3) To compute the relief, if any awarded in terms of money, if it can be so computed?
2. Petitioner called absent. No representation made. No claim statement filed in spite of giving sufficient time. Hence the industrial dispute is closed.
Written down and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th day of October 2010.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE, Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Karaikal.
————
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY The Employer/Management, M/s. Ulaga Nayaki Amman Steels, Keezhavur, Thirunallar. . . Respondent This case coming on 27-10-2010 for final hearing before me in the presence of Thiru V. Govindasamy, advocate for the petitioner and Thiru S. Suriyamoorthy, advocate for the respondent and upon hearing both sides and perusing the case records, this court delivered the following :
AWARD
This industrial dispute arises out of the reference made by the Government under section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act in G. O. Rt. No. 81/AIL/Lab./J/2009, dated 3-6-2009 in and by which the following references were made to this court for adjudication.
LABOUR DEPARTMENT
(G.O. Rt. No. 23/AIL/Lab./J/2011, dated 3rd February 2011)
NOTIFICATION
W h e r e a s , t h e Aw a r d i n I . D . N o . 6/ 2 0 0 9 , dated 27-10-2010 of the Labour Court, Karaikal in respect of the industrial dispute between the management of M / s . Ulaga Nayaki Amman Steels, Karaikal and Thiru R. Sekar, Karaikal over non-employment has been received;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947), read with the no t i f i c a t i o n i s s u e d i n L a b o u r D e p a r t m e n t ' s G. O. Ms. No.20/91/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991, it is hereby (1) Whether the dispute raised by Thiru R. Sekar, Karaikal against the management of M/s. Ulaga Nayaki Amman Steels, Karaikal over his non-employment is justified or not?
(2) If justified, to what relief, he is entitled to?
(3) To compute the relief, if any awarded in terms of money, if it can be so computed?
2. Claimant called absent. No claim statement filed. No representation. Hence the industrial dispute is closed.
Written down and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 27th day of October 2010.
R. MARGARET ROSALINE, Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Karaikal.