Hon'ble Bharati Sapru, J.
Heard Shri G.D Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri D.S Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the award of the Labour Court dated 13.03.1997 passed in Adjudication Case No. 170 of 1991.
By this award, the Labour Court has come to the conclusion that it is evident from the material on record and the statement given by the parties that the workman concerned has worked for 270 days as dairy man from December 1989 to 10.10.1990
The Labour Court has also recorded a finding that his removal by the employer is in violation of the provisions of 6-N of the Industrial Disputes Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner concerned is a cooperative society and has its own regulations in respect of employment which are known as U.P Cooperative Societies Service Regulations, 1975.
He has also relied on the decision of a division bench of this Court in the case of Ghaziabad Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd. Addl. Labour Commissioner reported in 2007 (2) AdJ 25 (SC), wherein the Apex Court has held that in view of the regulations of the societies act, provisions of Industrial Disputes Act would not apply.
However, the applicability of the Industrial Disputes Act to the societies such as the petitioner has now been referred to a larger Bench of the Apex Court, which is pending consideration.
This matter is pending since long, the workman has been denied the fruits of the award. In view of the fact that there is a clear finding that the retrenchment was in violation of Section 6-N, the dictum of the Apex Court with regard to such matters can be applied and in lieu of the reinstatement, compensation can be given to the petitioner.
Accordingly in view of the recent decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of U.P State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. v. Udai Narain Pandey reported in (2006) 1 SCC 479, Sita Ram v. Moti Lal Nehru Farmers Training Institute reported in (2008) 5 SCC 75, Jagbir Singh v. Haryana State Agriculture Mktg. Board reported in (2009) 15 SCC 327, Telegraph Deptt. v. Santosh Kumar Seal reported in (2010) 6 SCC 773, I think that it would be just & appropriate to modify the award of the Labour Court by giving the respondent-workman Rs. 50,000/- as compensation, which shall be paid to him within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order before the authority concerned. The order of reinstatement is set aside.
The writ petition is partly allowed.