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

[9]

®ı

Amﬂºƒˆ

ÿƒÀkVF¬˛wÁ\

2022 }

ƒ™kˆ |

11 {

No.

Poudouchéry

Mardi

Janvier

2022 (21 Pausa 1943)

No.

Puducherry

Tuesday

11th

January

2022

ÿ√VÚ·¶¬ÔD

SOMMAIRES

CONTENTS

√¬ÔD

Page

ÿ>Va_ ¿]\[≈› yÏ©AÔ^ ..

Sentence arbitral du Travail

Award of the Labour Court ..

de Tribunal.

∂´∑ ∂§s¬ÁÔÔ^

Notifications du Gouvernement

Government Notifications

ƒVu≈§¬ÁÔÔ^

Annonces

Announcements

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[11 January 2022

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

(G.O. Rt. No. 84/Lab./AIL/T/2021,

Puducherry, dated 27th December 2021)

NOTIFICATION

Whereas, an Award in I.D (L) No. 19/2019, dated

12-10-2021 of the Labour Court, Puducherry, in respect

of the Industrial Dispute between the Management

of M/s. Puducherry Tourism Development Corporation

Limited, Puducherry and Union workmen represented by

Puducherry Sutturla Valarchi Kazhaga Thinacooli

Oozhiyargal Nala Sangam, Kirumampakkam, Puducherry,

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.

Tuesday, the 12th day of October 2021.

I.D. (L) No. 19/2019

CNR. No. PYPY060000252019

1. S. Azhaganantham

2. L. Valampuriraj

3. A. Krishnamoorthy

4. K. Suresh Kumar

5. K. Manivelan

6. A. Sabarinathan

7. D. Suresh

8. R. Vengatraman

9. S. Santhakumar

10. M. Mathivanan

11. U. Udayasankar

12. I. Iyyappan

13. N. Seetharaman

14. K. Malaiyalathan

15. R. Rajavelu

16. T. Pavithran

17. P. Kathiravan

18. K. Karthick

19. R. Rajavendan

20. S. Vasantharaj

21. C. Ramakrishnan

22. R. Loganathan

23. N. Viji

24. A. Muthu Kumaran

25. C. Gobalakichenin

26. A. Ravi

27. K. Jothi

28. V. Sivaganthu

29. A. Anbarasan

30. J. Youvaraja

31. M. Kaliyappan

32. N. Allimuthu

33. M. Selambarasan

34. R. Arulnathan

35. V. Viragopal

36. P. Stalin

37. N. Prasath

38. K. Padma

39. K. Sivamoorthy

40. V. Oudayacoumar

41. V. Palani

42. M. Allimuthu

43. V. Rajavelu

44. D. Ramu

45. D. Ravichandiran

46. T. Marimuthu

47. S. Azhagappan

48. M. Santhalakshmi

49. M. Sathiyanarayanan

50. N. Priya

51. R. Rajabharathy

52. P. Murali

11 January 2022]

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

53. R. Arularasan

54. L. Ayyappan

55. V. Krishnamoorthy

56. A. Perumal

57. N. Jaisankar

58. J. Devanathan

59. M. Pazhanivelu

The Secretary,

Puducherry Suttrula Valarchi Kazhaga

Thinacooli Oozhiyargal Nala Sangam,

No. 58,Vinayagar Koil Street,

Kumaran Nagar, Aladimedu,

Kirumampakkam,

Puducherry.

. . Petitioners

Versus

The Managing Director,

M/s. Puducherry Tourism Development

Corporation Limited,

(A Government of Puducherry Undertaking)

No. 40, Goubert Avenue (Beach Road),

Puducherry.

. . Respondent

This Industrial Dispute coming on 13-09-2021 before

me for final hearing in the presence of Thiruvalargal

M. Gnanasekar and D. Pavithra, Counsels for the

petitioners, Thiru M. Nakkeeran, Counsel for the

respondent, 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. 42/AIL/Lab./T/2019, dated 14-03-2019 and

Corrigendum/Addendum, dated 06-05-2019 of the

Labour Department, Puducherry, to resolve the

following dispute between the petitioners and the

respondent viz.,

(a) Whether the dispute raised by the Union

workmen represented by Puducherry Suttrula Valarchi

Kazhaga Thinacooli Oozhiyargal Nala Sangam,

Kirumampakkam, Puducherry, against the management

of M/s. Puducherry Tourism Development Corporation

Limited, Puducherry, over non-employment of 54 + 5

totally 59 daily rated employees are justified or

not? If justified, what relief the Union workmen are

entitled to?

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

of money, if, it can be so computed?

2. Brief averments made in the claim statement of

the petitioners:

The petitioners sangam is a registered Trade

Union. The members of the Trade Union were

appointed in the respondent Puducherry Tourism

Development Corporation Limited on various dates

from 2013. They were initially engaged as daily rated

basis. All the members of the petitioners Union have

been continuously working with respondent

corporation without any break in service. The work

performed by the petitioners are perennial in nature

and required for long-term basis. All the petitioners

regularly working with the respondent corporation

without any complaint. All of a sudden, the

respondent corporation denied employment to the

members of the petitioners Trade Union with effect

from 17-08-2016. All the petitioners approached the

Chairman of Puducherry Tourism Development

Corporation Limited and he assured this is only a

break in service for 15 days and they will be brought

back to service with effect from 01-09-2016 onwards.

The petitioners were not given employment on

01-09-2016 as assured by the Chairman of the

respondent corporation. In the said circumstances

the 59 ousted daily rated workers approached the

Conciliation Authority for making arrangement for

reinstatement. The respondent management by a

letter, dated 07-04-2017 adopted the new method by

making engagement by e-tender system on

04-05-2017. The management called for contractors

for providing workers for house-keeping and

cleaning on out sourcing basis. The petitioners

approached the Hon’ble High Court in W.P. No. 9719/

2017 and the respondent were restrained by the order

of the Hon’ble High Court from out sourcing persons

for house-keeping and cleaning work in all Units of

Puducherry Tourism Development Corporation

Limited, Puducherry. The management failed to

consider the request for reinstatement and hence, the

Labour Officer, Conciliation has sent a failure report

to the Government of Puducherry. Now, the

Government of Puducherry, has referred the matter

before

the

Labour

Court,

Puducherry,

for

adjudication. The respondent corporation is

continuously earning profit. The petitioners worked

from the year 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. Therefore,

they cannot be blame that they were appointed

through back door. In fact, all the petitioners possess

sufficient qualification and has gain experience for

nearly 4 years in their respective Department.

Therefore, the non-employment of the petitioners is

unjustified which is not in accordance with

established principles of law. Their retrenchment is

illegal and void ab initio.

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[11 January 2022

3. Points for consideration:

(i) Whether the non-employment of the daily rated

employees in G.O. Rt. No. 42/AIL/Lab./T/2019, dated

14-03-2019 and Corrigendum/Addendum, dated

06-05-2019 of the Labour Department, Puducherry is

justified?

(ii) Whether the employees are entitled for

reinstatement in service with all attendant benefits?

4. Thiru Udayakumar was examined as PW.1 and

through him proof affidavit was filed. On behalf of the

petitioners Union EX.P1 to EX.P17 were marked on the

petitioner side.

5. In the evidence of PW.1, he has deposed that the

members of the petitioners Union were engaged by the

respondent corporation on daily rated basis and paid

monthly from the beginning of their engagement. All the

members of the petitioners Union worked continuously

without any break in service. The work performed by

the petitioners are perennial in nature and required

long-term basis. The petitioners are working in the

respondent corporation without any remarks. While so,

the respondent corporation has denied employment to

all the petitioner from 17-08-2016. When, the affected

employees met the Chairman of the respondent

corporation he has promised that they will be reinstated

for duty in their respective post from 01-09-2016.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submit

that the petitioners are appointed by the Puducherry

Tourism Development Corporation Limited, Puducherry,

which is the Government of Puducherry undertaking

from the year 2013 on various dates. The service utilized

by respondent corporation at the Main Office, Tourism

Wing, Project Cell, Boat House and Seagulls Restaurant.

From the beginning of the engagement of the

petitioners working with a respondent corporation

without any break in service. As such the respondent

corporation ought to have regularized the services of

the petitioners. At the time of filing the complaint before

the Labour Officer (Conciliation), all the 59 ousted daily

rated workers were contenting the claim. However,

presently the following petitioners are contesting:

Sl.

Name of the Employees

Date of Appointment

No.

(1)

(2)

(3)

V. Krishnamoorthy

01-05-2015

A. Perumal

01-05-2015

V. Oudayacoumar

04-06-2015

S. Azhaganandan

07-02-2015

A. Krishnamoorthy

02-07-2014

M. Pajanivel

01-05-2015

V. Palani

01-04-2013

M. Allimuthu

07-02-2015

J. Devanathan

01-05-2015

10.

N. Jayasankar

01-05-2015

11.

A. Anbarasan

02-01-2015

12.

V. Sivaganthu

2016

13.

L. Valampuri

11-04-2016

14.

A. Sabarinathan

02-04-2016

15.

N. Viji

11-06-2015

16.

V. Rajavelu

11-07-2015

17.

R. Venkatraman

10-07-2015

18.

K. Karthik

03-05-2016

19.

M. Santhanalakshmi

02-01-2015

20.

K. Kanthan

03-06-2015

7. The respondent has filed the report before which

the Labour Officer (Conciliation) on 19-12-2016 stating

that under no circumstances the respondent corporation

can consider the engagement of workers in the

petitioners Union and there is no scope for negotiations.

The respondent corporation has also expressed that

they are not in a position to engage the petitioners due

to critical financial position.

8. The respondent corporation having engaged the

petitioners from 01-01-2013 to 30-11-2016 as daily rated

workers. Considering the nature of work of the

petitioners it is perennial in nature and they were work

with the respondent without any break in service. The

respondent required the services of the petitioners

continuously. The respondent corporation having

utilized the services of the petitioner for a long-time has

denied employment to them without any justifiable

reasons. Though the petitioners are engaged as daily

rated workers the were paid monthly salary all along

their service. This Court is of the considered opinion

that the petitioners are represented without any

employment and without any income. The petitioners

are also submitted that they are not in gainfull

employment. The right to life enshrined in the Article

21 of the Constitution is something more than mere

animal existence.

9. This Court deem it fit to grant appropriate relief

to the petitioners by directing the respondent

corporation to reinstate the petitioners 1 to 20 in the

above-mentioned list in para 6 of this Award. However,

considering the circumstances of the case, this Court

is not inclined to grant back wages.

(1)

(2)

(3)

11 January 2022]

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

10. In the result, the petition is partly allowed. The

petitioners 1 to 20 are ordered to be rein stated by the

respondent corporation within a period of weeks from

the date of this Award. No costs.

Dictated to stenographer, transcribed by him,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, on

this 12th day of October, 2021.

R. BHARANIDHARAN,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

List of petitioner’s witness:

PW.1

— 23-08-2021

Oudayacoumar

List of petitioner’s exhibits:

Ex.P1

— 01-02-2015

Xerox copy of the Certificate

issued by the P.S. to

Welfare

Minister

from

01-01-2015 to 31-01-2015.

Ex.P2

— 01-02-2015

Xerox copy of the Certificate

issued by the P.S. to

Welfare

Minister

from

01-02-2015 to 28-02-2015.

Ex.P3

— 01-04-2015

Xerox copy of the Certificate

issued by the P.S. to

Welfare

Minister

from

01-03-2015 to 31-03-2015.

Ex.P4

— 01-05-2015

Xerox copy of the Certificate

issued by the P.S. to

Welfare

Minister

from

01-04-2015 to 30-04-2015.

Ex.P5

— 30-09-2015

Xerox copy of the Certificate

issued by the P.S. to

Welfare

Minister

from

01-09-2015 to 30-09-2015.

Ex.P6

— 31-10-2015

Xerox copy of the Certificate

issued by the P.S. to

Welfare

Minister

from

01-10-2015 to 31-10-2015.

Ex.P7

— 03-11-2016

Xerox

copy

the

Representation

the

petitioner Union.

Ex.P8

— 19-12-2016

Xerox

copy

the

Proceedings

the

Respondent

Corporation

vide No. 214/PTDC/Admn./

L.C./2016/779.

Ex.P9

— 06-01-2017

Xerox

copy

the

Representation

the

Petitioner Union.

Ex.P10 — 11-01-2017

Xerox

copy

the

Proceedings

the

Respondent

Corporation

vide No. 217/PTDC/Admn./

2016/017.

Ex.P11 — 12-01-2017

Xerox

copy

the

Representation

the

Petitioner Union.

Ex.P12 — 19-01-2017 Xerox

copy

the

Representation

the

Petitioner Union.

Ex.P13 — 07-04-2017

Xerox

copy

the

Representation

the

Petitioner Union.

Ex.P14 — 08-05-2017

Xerox copy of the Lawyer’s

Notice

issued

the

Petitioner Union.

Ex.P15 — 05-10-2018

Xerox

copy

the

Representation

the

Petitioner Union.

Ex.P16 — 20-07-2018

Xerox

copy

the

Proceedings

the

Respondent

Corporation

vide No. 217/PTDC/Admn./

2016/481.

Ex.PI7 — 02-08-2018

Xerox

copy

the

Proceedings

the

Respondent

Corporation

vide No. 217/PTDC/Admn./

2016/513.

List of respondent’s witness: Nil

List of respondent’s exhibits: Nil

R. BHARANIDHARAN,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

————

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

(G.O. Rt. No. 85/Lab./AIL/T/2021,

Puducherry, dated 27th December 2021)

NOTIFICATION

Whereas, an Award in I.D (L) No. 16/2020, dated

07-10-2021 of the Labour Court, Puducherry, in respect

of the Industrial Dispute between Management of

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

[11 January 2022

M/s. Pondicherry Co-operative Spinning Mills Limited

(P. 396), Thirubuvanai, Puducherry and Thiru S. Singaravelu,

Thirubuvanai, Puducherry, over reinstatement in service

with all attendant benefits, Puducherry 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.

Thursday, the 7th day of October 2021.

I.D. (L) No. 16/2020

CNR. No. PYPY060000482020

Thiru S. Singaravelu,

No. 6, 2nd Cross,

Indira Nagar

Thiruvandarkoil,

Puducherry.

. . Petitioner

Versus

The Managing Director,

M/s. Pondicherry Co-operative

Spinning Mills Linited P. 396,

Pondy – Villupuram National Highway,

Thirubuvanai,

Puducherry

. . Respondent

This Industrial Dispute coming on this day before

me for hearing, both the petitioner and respondent

remained absent, no representation have been made on

their behalf, upon perusing the 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. 99/AIL/Lab./2020, dated 01-10-2020 of the Labour

Department, Puducherry to resolve the following

dispute between the petitioner and the respondent, viz.,-

(i) Whether the dispute raised by Thiru

S. Singaravelu, Thirubuvanai, Puducherry, against

the management of M/s. Pondicherry Co-operative

Spinning Mills Limited (P. 396), Thirubuvanai,

Puducherry, over reinstatement in service with all

attendant benefits is justified or not? If justified,

what relief the petitioner is entitled to?

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

of money if, it can be so computed?

2. Today, when the case came up for hearing,

petitioner called absent. Notice sent to the petitioner

on 01-03-2021, 01-04-2021 and 21-05-2021 were returned

as unclaimed. Petitioner and Respondent were served

on 27-11-2021 and 20-08-2021. Both parties called

absent. No representation. for both sides. Hence, the

reference is closed.

Written and pronounced by me in the open Court,

on this 7th day of October, 2021.

R. BHARANIDHARAN,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

————

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

(G.O. Rt. No. 86/Lab./AIL/T/2021,

Puducherry, dated 28th December 2021)

NOTIFICATION

Whereas, an Award in I.D (T) No. 17/2020, dated

06-10-2021 of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Puducherry, in respect of the Industrial Dispute

between Management of M/s. Hindusthan National

Glass & Industries Limited, Sedarapet Main Road,

Thondamanatham, Puducherry and the union workmen

represented by HNG Thozhilalar Sangam (ULF),

Thondamanatham, Puducherry, over non-payment of

20% bonus and ex-gratia for an amount of ` 10,000 for

the year 2017-18 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).

11 January 2022]

LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-

LABOUR COURT AT PUDUCHERRY

Present :Thiru R. BHARANIDHARAN, M.L.

Presiding Officer.

Wednesday, the 6th day of October 2021.

I.D. (T) No. 17/2020

CNR. No. PYPY060000382020

The Secretary,

HNG Thozhilalar Sangam (ULF),

Thondamanatham,

Puducherry.

. . Petitioner

Versus

The Managing Director,

M/s. Hindusthan National

Glass & Industries Limited,

Villianur, Sedarapet Main Road,

Thondamanatham Village,

Puducherry.

. . Respondent

This Industrial Dispute coming on this day

before me for hearing, in the presence of Thiruvalargal

L. Sathish, S. Velmurugan, E. Karthick and S. Sudarsanan,

Counsels for the respondent, on record, the petitioner

remained absent, no representation have been made on

his behalf, upon perusing the records, this Court

passed the following:

AWARD

This Industrial Dispute arises out of the reference

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

No. 92/AIL/Lab./T/2020, dated 20-07-2020 of the Labour

Department, Puducherry, to resolve the following

dispute between the petitioner and the respondent, viz.,-

(i) Whether the dispute raised by the Union

workmen represented by HNG Thozhilalar Sangam

(ULF), Thondamanatham, Puducherry, against the

management of M/s. Hindusthan National Glass &

Industries

Limited,

Sedarapet

Main

Road,

Thondamanatham, Puducherry, over non- payment of

20% bonus and ex-gratia for an amount of ` 10,000

for the year 2017-2018 is justified or not? If justified,

what relief the Union workmen are entitled to?

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

of money if, it can be so computed?

2. Today, when the case came up for hearing,

Counsel for respondent present. Petitioner called

absent. no representation. notice already served on the

petitioner on 28-10-2020, 11-05-2021 and 19-08-2021.

Since the petitioner is continuously absent keeping the

reference pending would not serve any useful purpose.

Hence, the reference is closed.

Written and pronounced by me in the open Court,

on this 6th day of October, 2021.

R. BHARANIDHARAN,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Puducherry.

GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

(G.O. Rt. No. 90/Lab./G/2021,

Puducherry, dated 24th December 2021)

NOTIFICATION

Whereas, the management of M/s. The Cinema

Providence, Providence Mall, Puducherry, have applied

for grant of exemption from certain provisions of the

Puducherry Shops and Establishments Act, 1964, to

conduct special morning shows on account of

screening new films;

And whereas, the Lieutenant-Governor, Puducherry,

has by Notification in G.O. Ms. No. 9/95/Lab., dated

07-04-1995 under sub-section (1) of section 52 of the

Puducherry Shops and Establishments Act, 1964,

authorized the Secretary to Government, Labour

Department, Puducherry, to exercise the powers of the

Government under section 6 of the said Act, relating to

exemption;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred

by section 6 of the said Act, the Secretary to

Government, Labour Department, Puducherry, hereby

exempts M/s. The Cinema Providence, Providence Mall,

Puducherry, from the provisions of the section 16(1),

17(1), 17(2) and 18 of the Puducherry Shops and

Establishments Act, 1964, for conducting special

morning free shows as per Table:

Sl.

Name of the

Date and Time

No.

theatre

movie

of screening

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1 M/s. The Cinema Screen-1 (410)- 24-12-2021 to

Providence,

Spider Man,

26-12-2021 @

Providence Mall,

Screen-2 (410)- 08.30 a.m.

Puducherry.

Spider Man,

onwards.

Screen-3 (231)-

Rocky,

Screen-4 (229)-

Matrix,

Screen-5 (231)-

Writer.