Madras High Court
K.Palanichamy vs The Presiding Officer on 6 April, 2022
W.A(MD)Nos.438 of 2011 etc. batch
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.A(MD)Nos.438 to 441 of 2011
and
M.P.(MD)Nos.2, 2, 2, 2 and 3 of 2011
K.Palanichamy ... Appellant in W.A.(MD)No.438 of 2011
K.Murugan ... Appellant in W.A.(MD)No.439 of 2011
A.Basheer Ahamed ... Appellant in W.A.(MD)No.440 of 2011
S.P.Vanarajan ... Appellant in W.A.(MD)No.441 of 2011
-Vs-
1.The Presiding Officer,
Labour Court, Trichy.
2.DD-218, Palani Agricultural Producers'
Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd.,
67, Dindigul Road, Palani,
Dindigul District,
Rep. through its Special Officer. ... Respondents in all W.As.
COMMON PRAYER: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, praying this Court to set aside the common order dated 01.10.2009
made in W.P(MD)Nos.3930, 3977, 10108 and 10109 of 2005.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.A(MD)Nos.438 of 2011 etc. batch
For Appellants : Mr.S.Karthik,
(in all W.As.) For M/s.Profexs Associates
For R1 : Court
For R2 : Mr.P.Chandra Bose
(in all W.As.)
COMMON JUDGMENT
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
AND
N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.
The appellants in these Writ Appeals were employed as Salesman
with the second respondent Society. They were suspended on 07.04.1987 for
certain delinquencies and charge memo was issued to them on 08.06.1987,
accusing them of non-delivery of 15 quintals of rice to the card holders.
Criminal cases were also registered againt them. After enquiry, the appellants
were dismissed from service on 21.08.1989. They were, however, acquitted
from all the criminal charges in S.T.C.No.69 of 1988 on 26.02.1993. The
petitioners moved the Labour Court, seeking re-employment. It is also claimed
that some of the delinquent employees were re-employed in the service as per
the order of Assistant Commissioner of Labour.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.438 of 2011 etc. batch
2.The Labour Court, by order dated 30.12.2004, directed
reinstatement without backwages. The said order was challenged by the
Society in W.P.(MD)Nos.3930, 10107 to 10109, 3977, 3979 of 2005 and W.P.
(MD)Nos.67 and 150 of 2006. The appellants herein have filed W.P.(MD)Nos.
3659, 3660 3661 and 3663 of 2007, seeking reinstatement along with
backwages. The Writ Court allowed the Writ Petitions filed by the Society and
set aside the order of the reinstatement. However, it dismissed the Writ
Petitions filed by the appellants herein. Aggrieved by the same, the workmen
are on appeal before us.
3.It is stated that the appellant in W.A.(MD)No.440 of 2011 is no
more. Hence, the said Writ Appeal abates and the same is dismissed as having
abated.
4.Insofar as other Writ Appeals are concerned, the learned counsel
appearing for the appellants would submit that all the appellants have crossed
the age of superannuation and therefore, there is no question of reinstatement as
of now. At best, they would be entitled for some compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.438 of 2011 etc. batch
5.Mr.P.Chandra Bose, learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent / Society would submit that the respondent Society's financial
position is not very comfortable and therefore, the payment of compensation
would be difficult, even though the society sympathized with the workmen.
6.It is also brought to our notice that the Supervisory staff in the
society, who approached the Assistant Commissioner of Labour under the Tamil
Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, were reinstated without questioning the
order of Assistant Commissioner of Labour. We also feel that the punishment
of dismissal from service for the charges is disproportionate to the
delinquencies. However, taking note of the financial position of the Society
and the fact that the appellants have attained the age of superannuation, we
modify the order of the learned Single Judge and direct the Society to pay
consolidated monetary compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) each to the appellants in W.A.(MD)Nos.438, 439 and 441 of 2011. The
parties shall bear their own costs in the appeals. If the legal heirs of the
appellant in W.A.(MD)No.440 of 2011 make any application, the second
respondent Society shall also consider it favorably. The benefit of the
compensation may be extended to them also.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.438 of 2011 etc. batch
7.In view of the above, the Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD)Nos.438, 439
and 441 of 2011 stand partly allowed. No Costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[R.S.M.,J.] & [N.S.K.,J.]
06.04.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Myr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.438 of 2011 etc. batch
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
AND
N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.
Myr
COMMON JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A(MD)Nos.438 to 441 of 2011
06.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
