Amﬂºƒˆ \VWÈ ∂´E>µ

La Gazette de L' État de Poudouchéry

The Gazette of Puducherry

∂]ÔV´D ÿ√u≈ ÿkπX|

Publiée par Autorité

Published by Authority

Registered with the Registrar

of Newspapers for India

under No. 10410

Registered No. PY/44/2021-23

[517]

®ı

Amﬂºƒˆ

ÿƒÀkVF¬˛wÁ\

2021 }

ÂkD√Ï |

23 {

No.

Poudouchéry

Mardi

Novembre

2021 (2 Agrahayana 1943)

No.

Puducherry

Tuesday

23rd

November

2021

ÿ√VÚ·¶¬ÔD

SOMMAIRES

CONTENTS

√¬ÔD

Page

ÿ>Va_ ¿]\[≈› yÏ©AÔ^ ..

518

Sentence arbitral du Travail

.. 518

Award of the Labour Court .. 518

de Tribunal.

∂´∑ ∂§s¬ÁÔÔ^

520

Notifications du Gouvernement

.. 520

Government Notifications

.. 520

WÈ su√Á™ ∂§s©A

527

Avis de vente de terrain

.. 527

Notice of Sale of Land

.. 527

Œ©√ ∂§s©AÔ^

531

Avis d’ appel d’ offres

.. 531

Tender notices

.. 531

g√›>V™ WÆk™∫Ô^

532

Etablissements dangereux

.. 532

Dangerous Establishments

532

ƒVu≈§¬ÁÔÔ^

537

Annonces

.. 537

Announcements

537

]Ú›>D

540

Corrigendum

.. 540

Corrigendum

.. 540

518

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[23 November 2021

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

(G.O. Rt. No. 76/AIL/Lab./T/2021,

Puducherry, dated 13th November 2021)

NOTIFICATION

Whereas, an Award in I.D (L) No. 23/2019, dated

27-09-2021 of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Puducherry, in respect of the Industrial Dispute

between the management of M/s. M.S. Polymers,

Villianur Commune, Puducherry and Thiru G. Veerappan,

Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District, Tamil Nadu, 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 23-05-1991, it is hereby directed

by the Secretary to Government (Labour) that the said

Award shall be published in the Official Gazette,

Puducherry.

(By order)

D. MOHAN KUMAR,

Under Secretary to Government (Labour).

————

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-

LABOUR COURT AT PUDUCHERRY

Present :Thiru R. BHARANIDHARAN, M.L.

Presiding Officer.

Monday, the 27th day of September 2021.

I.D. (L) No. 23/2019

CNR. No. PYPY060000392019

G. Veerappan,

No. 226, Mariamman Koil Street,

Perambai Village, Vanur Taluk,

Villupuram District,

Tamil Nadu.

. . Petitioner

Versus

The Managing Director,

M/s. M.S. Polymers,

R.S. No. 33/2, Koodappakkam

Revenue Village,

Villianur Main Road, Pathukannu,

Villianur Commune,

Puducherry.

. . Respondent

This Industrial Dispute coming on 03-09-2021 before

me for final hearing in the presence of Thiruvalargal

R.T. Shankar, P. Suresh and B. Balamurugan Counsels

for the petitioner, the respondent being called absent

and set ex parte, upon hearing the petitioner and

perusing the case records, this Court delivered the

following:

AWARD

This Industrial Dispute arises out of the reference

made by the Government of Puducherry vide G.O. Rt.

No. 64/AIL/Lab./T/2019, dated 24-04-2019 of the Labour

Department, Puducherry to resolve the following

dispute between the petitioners and the respondent viz.,

(a) Whether the dispute raised by the petitioner

Thiru G. Veerappan, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District,

against the management of M/s. M.S. Polymers,

Villianur Commune, Puducherry, over non-employment

is justified or not? If justified, what relief the

petitioner is entitled to?

(b) To compute the relief, if any, awarded in terms

of money if, it can be so computed?

2. Brief facts of th case of the petitioner:

The petitioner has joined a Driver/Assistant in the

respondent company in the year 2012 he has performed

his duties without giving any room for any remarks

and he has worked more than 300 days in each

calendar year. The respondent management failed to

regularise his services. When the petitioner insisted,

the management to make him as a permanent worker

the respondent without any justifiable reason has

stopped him at main gate on 15-04-2017 and not

permitted him to attend his regular work. When the

petitioner asked reason for his non-employment, the

Managing Director replied that there is no necessity

to give any reason for him. The petitioner did not

commit any misconduct in the company, but, the

management has projected with false allegation. The

respondent management has orally terminated his

employment without any termination order or

statutory notice which is against the principles of

natural justice and section 25(F) of the Industrial

Disputes Act. The respondent management has

exploited his tender age for a period of 5 years and

terminated him without any justifiable reason. The

petitioner is entitled for reinstatement with continuity

of service and with full back wages and all other

attendant benefits.

3. On the respondent side, the respondent was set

ex parte. On the petitioner side the petitioner Thiru

Veerappan, son of Govindaraj, was examined as PW1

519

23 November 2021]

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

his chief affidavit was filed before this Court through

him EX.P1 to Ex.P5 were marked. In the evidence of PW1

he has deposed that he has joined the services of the

respondent management in the year 2012 and his last

drawn salary was ` 13,000 per month he has no adverse

remarks in his entire services. On 15-04-2017 without any

reason, show cause notice or termination order, he was

stopped at the main gate from attending his regular

work. The act of the respondent management is

absolutely illegal. On examination of PW1 petitioner side

was closed.

4. Points for consideration:

Whether the dispute raised by the petitioner Thiru

G. Veerappan, against the management of M/s. M.S.

Polymers, Villianur Commune, Puducherry, over

non-employment is justified or not?

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in his

argument submit that ever since, the date of his

appointment in the year 2012 the petitioner was

discharged his duties without any adverse remarks and

without any misconduct. Since, the petitioner was in

long continuous service he has requested the

management to regularise his services, when the

management failed to consider his request he has

insisted for making him as permanent employee of the

management. The management was not inclined to

regularise his services in order to avoid payment of

excess salary and other attendant benefits. The

management of the company as a vindictive measure has

stopped him at main gate on 15-04-2017 without any

notice or termination order. The respondent management

has not issued any charge memo and conducted

domestic enquiry. The oral termination of services by

the respondent management is unknown to the labour

jurisprudence and pray for reinstatement of the

petitioner in the services of the respondent management

with continuity of service and all other attendant back

wages.

6. This Court has carefully considered the evidence

of PW1 exhibits marked on the petitioner side and the

arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the

petitioner side. Since, the respondent management has

not considered the request of the petitioner, the

petitioner has approached the Labour Conciliation

Officer by submitting letter, dated 06-09-2017

conciliation was held before the Conciliation Officer in

several rounds and on various dates, but, the

Conciliation ended in failure hence, the reference was

made to this Court for adjudication.

7. On the petitioner side EX.P4 fifty numbers of

monthly salary payment covers were marked. In Ex.P5

letter submitted by the respondent management to the

Conciliation Officer on 10-11-2017 they have submitted

that the petitioner is in the habit of taking frequent leave

and he was attending the office in a drunken condition

which causes serious inconvenience of the other

employees of the respondent management. The

petitioner has also used unparliamentary words as

against the supervisors and other employees. Though

the respondent management has raised various

allegations as against the petitioner in the letter, dated

10-11-2017, the respondent has not issued any show

cause notice or charge memo before terminating his

services the employment of the petitioner was admitted

by the respondent management in the Conciliation

proceedings. It is not a case of the respondent that the

petitioner was gainfully employed somewhere else.

8. The petitioner was in the services of the Company

for about 5 years. The respondent management has not

followed the principles of law and the principles of

natural justice before terminating the services of the

petitioner. The petitioner who was in the services of the

respondent company would certainly affected by the

unexpected termination of his employment. Under

Article 21 of the Constitution, the right to life includes

right to live with human dignity one cannot live with

human dignity when his employment is at peril. This

Court is of the considered opinion that the respondent

management having failed to follow the principles of law

and the principles of natural justice is liable to reinstate

the petitioner with continuity of service, back wages

and all other attendant benefit. Since, the termination

order was issued when the petitioner found guilty after

conducting Domestic Enquiry the respondent is at fault.

Hence, the petitioner is entitled for back wages without

any deductions.

In the result, the petition is allowed. The

respondent management is directed to reinstate the

petitioner with continuity of service. The respondent

management is further directed to pay his back wages

with all other attendant benefits. The respondent

management is directed to implement this Award within

a period of 8 weeks from the date of this order. No costs.

Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by him,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on

this the 27th day of September, 2021.

R. BHARANIDHARAN,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

520

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[23 November 2021

List of petitioner’s witness:

PW.1

— 03-09-2021

Veerappan

List of petitioner’s exhibits:

Ex.P1

— 08-02-2019

Xerox copy of the Failure

report.

Ex.P2

— 06-09-2017

Xerox copy of the letter sent

by the petitioner to the

Labour Conciliation Officer.

Ex.P3

— 24-04-2019

Xerox

copy

the

Notification issued by the

Labour Department.

Ex.P4 —

Original Salary Bills (15 Nos.)

Ex.P5

— 10-11-2017

Xerox

copy

the

Respondent Letter.

List of respondent’s witnesses: Nil

List of respondent’s exhibits: Nil

R. BHARANIDHARAN,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

No. 8558/AIL/Lab./G/2021/1718.

Puducherry, dated 18th October 2021.

ORDER

In pursuance of the directions of the Ministry of

Labour and Employment, Government of India,

New Delhi vide D.O. Letter No. M-16011/01/2019-SS-III,

dated 13th August, 2021, it is proposed to constitute

District Level Implementation Committee in Puducherry

District for mobilizing the unorganized workers as

follows:

(I)

District Collector, Puducherry

. . Chairman

(II)

Deputy Labour Commissioner

. . Member-

Secretary.

(III)

Commissioner,

. . Member

Puducherry Municipality.

(IV)

District Coordinator of Common

. . Member

Service Centres (CSCs).

(V)

All Block Development Officers

. . Members

(VI)

District Informatics Officer,

. . Member

National Informatics Centre (NIC).

(VII)

District Level Officers of line

. . Members

Departments (e.g. Social Welfare

Officer, Women and Child

Development Officer, Information

and Publicity/Elementary

Education Officer/Agriculture

Officer/Fishery Officer).

(VIII)

President/Secretary of State Level . . Members

Unions/Associations of –

(a) Unorganised workers

(b) BOCW workers

Urban Livelihood Mission (NULM)

and National Rural Livelihood Mission

(NRLM)) Members.

(d) Domestic workers

(e) ASHA workers

(f) Anganwadi workers

(g) Street vendors

(h) Rickshaw-pullers

(i) Brick-kiln workers

(j) Agricultural labourers

(k) MGNREGA workers

(l) Fishermen and any other such

Workers Associations.

2. The functions of the Implementation Committee

are as detailed below:

(i) Review the progress of Registrations of

unorganized works against the target in the District.

(ii) Review and monitor the working of field level

individual Common Service Centres (CSCs) and State

Seva Kendras (SSK) in the District and achieving

targets under e-SHRAM.

(iii) Mobilize target sub-groups of unorganised

workers such as MGNREGA Workers, SHG Members

under NRLN/NULM, Street vendors, Rickshaw-

pullers, Construction (BOCW) workers, Mid-day meal

workers, Domestic workers, ASHA workers,

Anganwadi

workers,

Agricultural

labourers,

Fishermen and Brick-kiln workers through respective

line Department within the District for Registrations

under e-SHRAM portal.

(iv) Mobilize target groups of prospective

beneficiaries for Registrations in e-SHRAM through

respective Labour Unions/Workers’ Associations/

Federations/Civil Society Organizations/NGOs working

for welfare of unorganized workers.