The Madras High Court has declined to grant any relief to TTK Group Employees Union, Ussoor, Vellore district , on its demand to reinstate 19 retrenched workers by setting aside award dated 3-4-2006 of Labour Court, Salem. The union had raised an industrial dispute pertaining to retrenchment of the workers by management of TTK Prestige Ltd, Hosur.
In a writ petition, the union challenged award of Labour Court (respondent 1) dismissing an industrial dispute raised by union. Petitioner contended that management (respondent 2) was carrying on manufacturing activity in Rayakota Road, Hosur in same building and retrenchment was illegal. While all other workers, during that time, paid bonus at 20 per cent, these retrenched workers, after dispute was raised by petitioner, were paid bonus of only 10 per cent. The management “deliberately” retrenched 19 workers, and it was not a case of real closure, as management had not surrendered the factory licence and cancelled the lease agreement, petitioner said.
The management refuting stand of petitioner-union, contended that due to acute competition from countries like China, they suffered loss in export market, and they wanted to stop production. For some time, they were getting orders from their sister concern for repair of existing gadgets. That work also came to halt. Having left with no other option, these 19 workers had been retrenched. They were paid compensation in terms of Industrial Disputes Act. Hence, there was no illegality in the retrenchment. Allegation of petitioner that work was being carried on in godown at Rayakota Road was baseless, they submitted.
According to report dated 6-4-2004 submitted by Advocate Commissioner, there was no activity being carried on in said premises. Labour Court, which perused this report declined to grant any relief and rejected the industrial dispute raised by Union.
Mr Justice K. Chandru, who heard writ petition, ruled no infirmities were found in impugned award of R-1. Inasmuch as there was no allegation of violation of procedure contemplated u/s 25-F of ID Act and Advocate Commissioner's report clearly showed no other activity was being carried on in premises in question, this court did not find any case was made out to interfere with impugned award. Hence, writ petition stood dismissed, the Judge held.