[713]
SOMMAIRES
CONTENTS
Page
Page
..
714
Sentence arbitral du travail
.. 714
Award of the Labour Court
.. 714
de tribunal
..
716
Notifications du Gouvernement .. 716
Government Notifications
.. 716
..
717
Avis d’ appel d’ offres
.. 717
Tender Notices
.. 717
..
720
Etablissements dangereux
.. 720
Dangerous Establishments
..
720
..
721
Annonces
.. 721
Announcements
..
721
La Gazette de L' État de Poudouchéry
The Gazette of Puducherry
Publiée par Autorité
Published by Authority
2024 }
|
22 {
No.
43
Poudouchéry
Mardi
22
Octobre
2024 (30 Asvina 1946)
No.
Puducherry
Tuesday
22nd
October
2024
Registered with the Registrar
of Newspapers for India
under No. 10410
714
LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT
[22 October 2024
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY
LABOUR DEPARTMENT
(G.O. Rt. No. 79/AIL/Lab./S/2024,
Puducherry, dated 23rd September 2024)
NOTIFICATION
Whereas, an Award in I.D. (L) No. 25/2022, dated
30-05-2024 of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Puducherry, in respect of dispute between the
M/s. E-Mox Manufacturing Private Limited, Puducherry
and All India United Trade Union Centre (AIUTUC),
Puducherry, over non-employment of Thiru A. Govindaraj
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. 20/9/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991, it is hereby directed
by the Secretary to Government (Labour), that the said
Award shall be published in the Official Gazette,
Puducherry.
(By order)
S. SANDIRAKUMARAN,
Under Secretary to Government (Labour).
————
BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-
LABOUR COURT AT PUDUCHERRY
Present : Thiru G.T. Ambika, M.L., PGDCLCF.,
Presiding Officer.
Thursday, the 30th day of May 2024
I.D(L). No. 25/2022
CNR. NO.PYPY06-000084-2022
The President/Secretary,
All India United Trade Union Centre,
Puducherry.
. . Petitioner
Versus
The Managing Director,
M/s. E-Mox Manufacturing Private Limited,
Assembly Division,
Puducherry-607 402.
. . Respondent
This industrial dispute coming on this day before me
for hearing in the presence of S. Sivakumar, President
of the Union appearing for petitioner and Thiruvalargal
K. Babu, S. Karthikeyan, Counsels for the respondent
and upon hearing the learned Counsel for petitioner
and respondent and on perusing the entire records of
the case, having stood over for consideration till this
date, this Court delivered the following:
AWARD
This Industrial Dispute has been referred by the
Government as per the G.O. Rt. No. 132/AIL/Lab./T/
2022, dated 05-08-2022 for adjudicating whether the
industrial dispute raised by the Trade Union viz., All
India United Trade Union Centre (AIUTUC),
Puducherry, against the Management of M/s. E-Mox
Manufacturing Private Limited, Puducherry, over
non-employment of Thiru A. Govindaraj 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 averments set forth in the claim statement
is as follows :
The respondent company is involved in the
manufacturing of mosquito repellent assembly unit
and around 400 workers are employed in it. The
petitioner joined the respondent company with effect
from 01-06-2006 in the Production Department. On
15-09-2021, the petitioner was not allowed to work
and when enquired no proper details were given. On
18-01-2021 and 01-11-2021, he wrote a letter to the
respondent company requesting for job which was
not received and so he sent the same through
registered post which were unclaimed by the
respondent company and so he approached the
Trade Union for his remedy.
(ii) On 13-06-2022, a letter was sent to the
Conciliation Officer and the respondent company
failed to reply and so, the dispute was referred to
this Court. The Standing Orders of the respondent
company is not as per law and was obtained by
receiving the signature of the contract labourers. The
petitioner was also not provided the bonus for the
year 2021 and the same was issued during the
conciliation proceedings.
(iii) The petitioner is serving in the respondent
company for the past 16 years and without any
proper explanation, his service has been terminated
and his request also denied. From 15-09-2021 the
petitioner is jobless and suffering to maintain his
family. Hence, the petition.
715
22 October 2024]
LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT
3. Brief averments in the counter filed by the
Respondent is as follows :
The claim made by the petitioner on behalf of
Mr. A. Govindaraj, over his non-employment and the
allegations contained in the claim statement are
baseless, vexatious, devoid of merits and concocted
with reference to the facts alleged and is not
maintainable in law or on facts and liable to be
dismissed. The petitioner Union has no representative
character to raise any charter of demands or any
other dispute as against this respondent as there is
no espousal of the dispute by a substantial number
of workmen as required by law, in order to sustain
an industrial dispute. Only a workman can approach
the Conciliation Officer/Labour Court/Industrial
Tribunal in respect of his claim if any. Admittedly,
Mr. A. Govindaraj does not fall within the ambit of
workman, he was initially appointed as Production
Supervisor with effect from 01-06-2006 vide
appointment order, dated 31-05-2006 and then
promoted as Senior Officer - Production with revision
of salary with effect from 01-04-2017 vide letter, dated
11-10-2017. His last drawn monthly salary was
30,235. He was functioning as shift incharge and
responsible to train and conduct workmen, resolves
problems in the production line and ensure output
of productivity from the workers. His job profile,
monthly emoluments and other privileges are in line
with the Management Category. Under such
circumstances, the respondent prays to take up the
issue of jurisdiction and the authority of the
petitioner Union as preliminary issues among other
issues and decide the same at the first instance.
(ii) In the month of July 2020, the respondent
management came to know that he was running a
manpower contract and on enquiry he informed the
respondent management that his sister was running
the manpower contract and assured that he would
have over the contract to someone else. The
respondent company is engaged in manufacture of
mosquito repellent machine assembly and the
petitioner has insisted only night shift duties in the
months of August and September 2021 and the
respondent management allowed him to come in night
shifts. Thereafter he continued to insist night shift
duty permanently. The respondent management got
repeated complaints against him for sleeping during
working hours and decided the inquire the matter. On
enquiry the respondent management was shocked to
find that the said Govindaraj has setup a manpower
organization namely, K.M.Enterprises in the name of
his wife Mrs. G. Santhi and was supplying around
200 manpower to M/s. Star Converters located at
Kilianur Main Road, Konjumangalam who is a
competitor for the respondent factory and they are
also producing similar products using the same
machinery and technology of what respondent was
using. He worked in the respondent organization and
has got 15 years of experience and has through
knowledge in the production and business of the
respondent.
(iii) The petitioner obtained EPF, ESIC Registration
Certificate under the Shops and Establishment Act
in the name of his orgainzation M/s. K.M.Enterprises
at Puducherry. The petitioner has misused the
respondent company computer, printer and stationary
for printing the salary ledger of his own enterprises
and was caught red-handed and asked to attend a
preliminary enquiry on 14-09-2021 in the presence of
the Factory Manager and the Production Manager
and produced all the evidence and the petitioner got
tensed and thrown resignation letter in anger and left
the premises immediately. The management decided
to initiate disciplinary action against him and as such
he was issued with a detailed charge-sheet, dated
12-11-2021. Even on receipt of the said charge-sheet
the petitioner has not submitted any explanation. An
domestic enquiry was conducted on 04-12-2021,
21-12-2021, 10-01-2022 and 12-02-2022 and even on
providing ample time
and oppurtunity the
charge-sheeted official never attended the enquiry
on the dates mentioned above and the enquiry was
proceeded ex parte.
(iv) The findings of the enquiry were supported
by the logical reasoning and applications of mind by
the Enquiry Officer. After considering the gravity of
the misconduct, a show cause notice, dated 23-03-2022
seeking his comments on the enquiry report. Since,
the conciliation proceedings were pending and
subsequently the matter was referred to this Court,
the respondent has not taken further action.
Considering the conduct of the petitioner, the
respondent has lost confidence in the service of the
petitioner and so, the petitioner is not entitled to any
relief and prays for the dismissal of the same.
4. The points for consideration are :
Whether the petitioner is entitled for the relief as
prayed in the claim petition?
5. On points :
On the side of the petitioner, the petitioner was
examined as PW1 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P15 were marked.
716
LA GAZETTE DE L’ETAT
[22 October 2024
6. Today the case was called for reporting settlement,
petitioner/workman and petitioner Union present,
Counsel for respondent present. Memo filed by the
petitioner stating that both parties to the dispute have
entered into compromise and thereby settlement
agreement was entered between the parties on
27-05-2024. In the memo it is further stated that full and
final settlement has been arrived between the parties
and therefore, the petitioner is withdrawing the dispute
raised by him and further to record the same by this
Court.
7. Hence, this Court on considering the memo and
settlement filed by both parties finds that there does
not survive anything more for consideration in this
case.
In the result, this petition is disposed in terms of
memo filed by the petitioner and settlement agreement,
arrived between the petitioner/workman and respondent
on 27-05-2024. The settlement agreement, dated
27-05-2024 shall form part and parcel of this Award.
There is no order as to costs.
Partly typed by the Stenographer, partly written and
pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 30th
day of May, 2024.
G.T. AMBIKA,
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Puducherry.
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY
LABOUR DEPARTMENT
(G.O. Rt. No. 81/Lab./AIL/S/2024,
Puducherry, dated 01st October 2024)
NOTIFICATION
Whereas, the Government is of the opinion that an
industrial dispute has arisen between the management
of M/s. New Pondy Hi-Tech Machineries, Kattukuppam,
Puducherry and Tmt. M. Jayasankari, over full and final
settlement, in respect of the matter mentioned in the
Annexure to this order;
And whereas, in the opinion of the Government, it
is necessary to refer the said dispute for adjudication;
Now, therefore, by virtue of the authority delegated
vide G.O. Ms. No. 20/9/Lab./L, dated 23-5-1991 of the
Labour Department, Puducherry, to exercise the powers
conferred by clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV
of 1947), it is hereby directed by the Secretary to
Government (Labour) that the said dispute be referred
to the Labour Court, Puducherry for adjudication.
The Labour Court, Puducherry, shall submit the Award
within 3 months from the date of issue of reference as
stipulated under sub-section (2-A) of section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and in accordance with
rule 10-B of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules,
1957. The party raising the dispute shall file a statement
of claim complete with relevant documents, list of
reliance and witnesses to the Labour Court,
Puducherry, within 15 days of the receipt of the order
of reference and also forward a copy of such statement
to each one of the opposite parties involved in the
dispute.
ANNEXURE
(i) Whether the industrial dispute raised by the
petitioner Tmt. M. Jayasankari, against the
management
of
M/s.
New
Pondy
Hi-Tech
Machineries, Kattukuppam, Puducherry, over full and
final settl ement is legal and j u s t i f i e d ? 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.
(By order)
S. SANDIRAKUMARAN,
Under Secretary to Government (Labour).
————
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY
CHIEF SECRETARIAT (HOUSING)
(G.O. Ms. No. 16/2024-Hg.,
Puducherry, dated 08th October 2024)
NOTIFICATION
In exercise of the powers conferred under section
4(1) of the Puducherry Town and Country Planning Act,
1969 (No. 13 of 1970), the Lieutenant-Governor, is
pleased to extend the term of office by one year of the
Members of the Puducherry Town and Country Planning
Board constituted vide G.O. Ms. No. 6/2021-Hg., dated
08-10-2021 of the Chief Secretariat (Housing), Government
of Puducherry.
(By order of the Lieutenant-Governor)
P. EJOUMALE,
Under Secretary to Government (Housing).