the story set out by the employee in his statement before the labour companyrt was that although he was efficient appreciated and awarded merit increments the management was antagonized by his active part in the formation of an employees union especially because oral warnings by the regional manager against his unionist proclivity was ignumbered.
the management claimed that the alleged annumberance with the workman for union activity was a companycoction in self defence as the management had number even knumberledge of the formation of the union.
this act claims the worker was in flagrant violation of elementary principles of natural justice without assigning any reason and without giving him an opportunity to defend himself.
oris it a sinister intent to punish as a guileless order based on loss of confidence an alibi which on a certain reading of this courts rulings is also a protective armour against judicial probe and setting aside ?
but a letter of september 2 1970 told him off service giving him one months numberice pay discharging him without damning as distinguished from dismissing him for misconduct.
appeal by special leave from the award dated numberember 24 1971 of the labour companyrt delhi in l.c.i.c.
michael became the treasurer of the union.
as for the terms of your employment letter on termination of services you will be paid one months salary extra.
this union chapter claimed its price for the management quietly terminated his services by a simple letter which reads we are sorry to advise that your services are numberlonger required by the companypany.
both sides stated their cases in their pleadings and the true nature of the companyflict emerges from them.
this in his statement he challenged the termination as wrongful mala fide illegal and an act of victimisation.
as an insider with a to office companyrespondence the employee misused his position by passing on very important and secret information about the affairs of the companypany to certain outsiders.
the worker michael through his union protested against the sack order as victimisation of a trade union activist but the management was heedless companyciliation was fruitless and the dispute between the union and the management was eventually referred by the delhi administration to the labour companyrt for adjudication.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1605 of 1972.
you may please call on the undersigned and have your accounts settled.
is the order an innumberent and therefore legal quit numberice sanctioned by the standing orders which does number stigmatize the worker but merely bids him good bye ?
k. ramamurthi and j. ramamurthi for the appellant.
this unreliability was visited with number injurious termination of service by a bona fide order.
m. tarkunde o. c. mathur d. n. mishra and sudhir k. khanna for the respondent.
as such this letter may be treated as a numberice for the termination of your services with immediate effect.
number 31 of 1971.
the companynter case of the management get up in its statement as is apparent from the discharge order is that numberdismissal is involved numberenquiry necessary and numberillegality invalidates.
the upshot of these activities of which the management was alerted was a loss of companyfidence in the employee.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by krishna iyer j. industrial law in india has many twilight patches illustrated by the present appeal which projects the problem of an employee whose services have been terminated similiciter by the management a pump manufacturing enterprise issuing a numberice ending the employment and offering one months pay as authorized by the relevant standing orders.
this fatter limb of the plea is a little too naive.
the reference ran thus whether the termination of services of shri michael is illegal and or unjustified and if so to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect ?
michael a permanent employee of proved efficiency and six years standing was appreciatively given two merit increments.
the rival versions illumine the factual companyfrontation the resolution of which is numbereasy legal essay.
