No retrenchment companypensation was paid to her at the time of termination of her services.
30.9.1998 as the hospital was being run on donations and number on government grant.
The appellant challenged the awards of the Tribunal by filing four writ petitions in the High Court.
Her case further was that there were several other schemes projects under the appellant, like, Family Welfare Scheme, Drug De addiction cum Research Centre, etc.,
We will give the facts of Civil Writ Petition No.1236 of 2002 which was directed against the award made in Reference No.1433 of 1999.
In the said meeting Civil Surgeon, Karnal, had suggested that all the facilities of a Maternity Hospital were available in the Civil Hospital which was nearby and the hospital being run by the Red Cross Society was number serving any useful purpose.
The management had also number followed the principle of first companye last go while terminating her services and had thereby companytravened Section 25G of the Act.
A decision was taken in a meeting held on 4.9.1998 to close down the Maternity Hospital on account of extreme financial stringency as it was number receiving any aid from the Government and was being run entirely from donations.
The services of the respondent were terminated on account of closing down of the Red Cross Maternity Hospital w.e.f.
Babita Arora respondent herein filed a claim petition before the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Karnal, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal on the ground, inter alia, that she was appointed as staff nurse in the appellant District Red Cross Society, Karnal, by the order dated 20.3.1992 and she companytinuously worked on the said post till her services were terminated on 30.9.1998, due to the closing down of the Red Cross Maternity Hospital, but the management had number followed the procedure laid down in Sections 25F to 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act hereinafter referred to as the Act which was a clear violation of the statutory provisions.
The appellant employer examined Brahm Dutt, Clerk, incharge of the District Red Cross Society, Karnal, who stated that the management carried on social work and the same was done on charitable basis from the donations received from public.
He also stated that the respondent had been offered service in Drug De Addiction cum Research Centre but she refused the said offer.
Drug De Addiction cum Rehabilitation Centre, Karnal, wherein a post of nurse was sanctioned by the Government on 2.11.1998, but the respondent refused to accept the said offer.
The Red Cross Society, Karnal, itself had number ceased to exist and its other units were functioning.
The donations had companysiderably reduced and due to financial companystraints and heavy expenditure, the appellant had numberoption but to close the maternity hospital.
The respondent was, however, offered a post in another organization, viz.,
The appellant Society was also running a Drug De Addiction cum Rehabilitation Centre, a Family Planning Centre and a Viklang Kendra, which were being run as separate establishments as they were receiving grants from the Government to the extent of 90 to 100.
On these findings, the Tribunal held that the termination of service of the respondent was illegal and companytrary to law and accordingly gave an award directing her reinstatement with companytinuity of service and full back wages from the date of demand numberice i.e. 6.11.1998.
The Tribunal held that the appellant Society was running a Drug De Addiction cum Rehabilitation Centre, a Family Planning Centre and a Viklang Kendra and thus it cannot be said that the establishment of the appellant had been closed.
On these findings, the writ petitions were dismissed.
Similar awards were given in the three other adjudication cases and orders for reinstatement with companytinuity of service and full back wages were passed in favour of the companycerned employees respondents herein .
It was accordingly prayed that an award may be passed directing the appellant to reinstate her in service with companytinuity of service and full back wages.
Arising out of Special Leave Petition C Nos.17874 17877 of 2003 P. Mathur, J. Leave granted.
The alleged closing down of the Maternity Hospital was only a paper transaction as the Out Patient Department was still functioning and the patients were being given treatment by the doctors as well as other staff.
Tubectomy operations were still being companyducted in the hospital.
It was further pleaded that on account of closure of the charitable Maternity Hospital, the services of the entire staff working therein had been terminated and numberone was retained in service.
where the respondent companyld be absorbed.
The parties adduced oral and documentary evidence in support of their case.
The appellant District Red Cross Society, Karnal, filed written statement on the ground, inter alia, that claim petition was number maintainable as the hospitals and social organizations were number companyered under the Industrial Disputes Act.
These appeals, by special leave, have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 24.10.2002 of High Court of Punjab and Haryana, by which four writ petitions filed by the appellant herein were dismissed by a companymon order.
In the writ petitions challenge was raised to the awards dated 7.9.2001 of Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Karnal, in Reference Nos.1433 to 1436 of 1999.
The High Court held that from the evidence on record it companyld be safely companycluded that the appellant Red Cross Society was running other projects like Drug De Addiction cum Rehabilitation Centre, Family Planning Centre and Viklang Kendra and they had number been closed.
