Madras High Court
The Executive Officer vs The Inspector Of Labour on 8 April, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.04.2021
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
The Hon'ble Mrs.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD) No.253 of 2020
The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Muppandal
Esakkiamman Temple (East),
Araivaimozhi Post,
Kanyakumari District.
... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs
1. The Inspector of Labour,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
2. N.Arumugam
3. The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Departments,
Kottar, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
... Respondents/Respondents
__________
Page 1 of 8
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
PRAYER: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order
dated 13.11.2019, passed in W.P.(MD) No.5317 of 2015.
For Appellant : Mr.H.Arumugam
For Respondents : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar,
Spl.Govt.Pleader for R1
Mr.N.Sivakumar for R2
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
Heard Mr.H.Arumugam, learned Counsel appearing for the
appellant, Mr.K.P.Narayana Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the first respondent and Mr.N.Sivakumar, learned Counsel
appearing for the second respondent.
2. This appeal filed by the Executive Officer, Arulmigu Muppandal
Esakkiamman Temple (East), Kanyakumari District, is directed against the
order in W.P(MD).No.5317 of 2015 dated 13.11.2019.
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
3. The said writ petition was filed by the Temple challenging the
order passed by the Inspector of Labour, Nagercoil, exercising powers under
the provisions of Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of
Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981.
4. Before the authority, the Temple raised the contention that the
second respondent is not entitled to maintain the petition before the
authority on the ground that he has to exhaust the remedy available under
the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments Act, 1959. Further it was contended that seeking prayer for
regularisation, the second respondent had filed W.P(MD).No.9617 of 2013,
which was pending at the relevant point of time. Further, it was submitted
that the Temple is not an organization which would be covered by the
provisions of the Act. The authority namely, Inspector of Labour, examined
the same and after taking out of the undisputed fact that the second
respondent had worked for more than 480 days directed conferment of
permanent status. The correctness of the order was tested by the Writ Court,
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
before which, the contentions raised by Mr.H.Arumugam, learned Counsel
for the appellant were canvassed and the learned Writ Court had elaborately
consider the matter and found as a matter of fact, that the second respondent
had worked as a daily wage earner for more than the statutory period,
therefore, entitled to the relief. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was
dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the Temple is before us.
5. The learned Counsel would submit that the issue as to whether the
Temple is an industrial establishment as defined under Section 2(3) of the
Act is yet to attain finality and the matter is now pending before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court. Furthermore, it is submitted that the sanctioned strength of
the Temple is only four posts namely, Ticket Collector, Maleshanthi,
Assistant Record Clerk and Assistant Writer. Therefore, the provisions of
the Act are not applicable. This contention was never advanced before the
authority and the appellant cannot be permitted to raise the contention for
the first time in this appeal. Though, we agree with the learned Counsel for
the appellant that the larger issue whether a Temple is a industrial
establishment or not, is still pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
do not express any opinion on the said issue, but would confirm the order of
the learned Single Bench only on facts.
6. One another argument which advanced before us was by
contending that the second respondent arrayed as an accused in a forgery
case for swindling funds of the Temple and the acquittal by the criminal
Court was on benefit of doubt and not a normal acquittal. To be noted, that
we are not examining the case of a person seeking public employment, but a
case where the second respondent seeks for conferment of permanent status
which has to be tested on the parameters laid down under the relevant Act.
7. The learned Counsel for the second respondent submitted that the
then Executive Officer of the Temple was the person, who had involved in
misappropriation and the second respondent is the low paid employee only
an Assistant to the Maleshanthi.
8. Therefore, we are of the clear view that the learned Single Bench
was right in not interfering with the order passed by the Inspector of
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
Labour. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal fails and dismissed. However, the
questions of law which were canvassed before us as to whether the Temple
is an industrial establishment and would fall within Section 2(3) of the
Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to
Workmen) Act, 1981 and the issue whether the Act can be applied to the
appellant Temple on account of large number of sanctioned posts etc., are
all left open. It is made clear that the decision shall not be treated as a
precedent. No costs.
(T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
08.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
pkn
Note : In view of the present lock down
owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that
the copy of the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
To
1. The Inspector of Labour,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
2. The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Departments,
Kottar, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.253 of 2020
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.A.(MD) No.253 of 2020
08.04.2021
__________
http://www.judis.nic.in
