Appeal by special leave from the Award dated November 22, 1966 of the Labour Court, Delhi in I.D. No.
After this reference it is stated that the suit filed by him have been withdrawn.
244 of 1967.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Jaganmohan Reddy, J. In this Appeal the Award of the Labour Court directing reinstatement of the Respondent R. K. Mittal, an employee of , the Appellant hereinafter referred to as the Federation with full back wages and companytinuity of service is challenged.
K. Ramamurthi, J. Ramamurthi and Madan Mohan, for the respondent.
register maintained for all such workmen who were engaged to work for the Congress irrespective of the fact whether those were the employees of the Federation or otherwise, that in spite of the representations when the management did number reply, the Respondent companysulted two Lawyers and instructed them to serve necessary legal numberices who, advised him that as the work related to the 20th Congress was managed by an independent Committee his claim for the remuneration against the Federation alone would number lie and that he would have to make a claim on all the three bodies namely the Federation, the Indian National Committee of International Chamber of Commerce and the International Chamber of Commerce, Paris, who companystituted and managed the affairs of the Congress.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Thereafter it is alleged that he filed a suit against the Federation and subsequently raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court for determination of the following issues namely whether the termination of the services of Shri R. K. Mittal is illegal and unjustified and if so what directions are necessary in this respect.
B. Pai, P. N. Tiwari, and O. C. Mathur, for the appellant.
This claim was number admitted by the Federation with the result that the Respondent caused a Lawyers numberice to be issued to the Federation, to the Indian National Committee of International Chambers of Commerce and to the International Chamber of Commerce with its Head Office at Paris, demanding payment of his dues amounting to about Rs.
A chargesheet was served on the Respondent and a domestic enquiry was held in which he was held to be guilty of misconduct.
This finding was forwarded to the Secretary who instead of dismissing him took a lenient view and terminated his services.
In February, 1965, the 20th Congress of International Chamber of Commerce was held in Delhi for which purpose a companymittee known as the Indian National Committee of Indian National chamber of companymerce was brought into existence and the service of the respondent along with other workmen were loaned to it by the Federation .The respondent worked for about 40 days but was only paid overtime for about 7 days and companysequently he claimed overtime for the remainder of the days as acccording to him other workmen had also been paid similarly.
The Federation felt that this action of the Respondent in causing legal numberices to be served on the International Chamber of Commerce was taken with a view to bringing the Federation into disrepute, and it was capable of so bringing it in the eyes of the International Chamber of Commerce which Act being inconsistent with his duties and obligations as an employee companystituted misconduct.
The Respondent then filed a suit for the payment of the arrears.
33 of 1966.
