Anil
Bapurao Kanase Vs. Krishna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd & ANR [1997] INSC
522 (7 May 1997)
K.
RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIRAHMAD, G.B. PATTANAIK
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
O R D
E R Leave granted.
The
appellant-employee wasengagedin the seasonalwork in theChemistry Section ofthe
sugar factory by the respondent No.1. Sincethe work was over, the services of
the appellant and others were terminated. He sought a reference under the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(for short, `the Act') contending that thetermination
being in the nature of retrenchment isin violation ofSection25-F of theIndustrial
Disputes Act. The IndustrialTribunal and the High Court negatived the
contention.
Learned
counsel for the appellant contends that the judgment of the High Court of
Bombay relied on in the impugned orderMarch 28, 1995in Writ Petition No.488 of
1994 is perhaps not applicable. Since the appellant has worked for more than
180 days, Since the appellant as retrenched employee and if theprocedure
contemplated under Section25-F ofthe Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 is applied
to, this retrenchment is illegal. We find no force inthis contention. InMorindaCo-op.Sugar
Mills Ltd. vs. Ram Kishan & Ors. [(1995) 5 SCC 653] in paragraph 3, this
Court has dealt with engagement of the seasonal workman in sugarcane crushing;
in paragraph 4, it is stated that it was not a case of retrenchment of the
workman, but of closure of the factory after crushing season was over.
Accordingly, in paragraph 5, it was held that it isnot `retrenchment ' within
the meaning ofSection2(oo) of the Act. Since the presentwork isseasonal
business, the principles of the Act have no application. However,this Court has
directedthat the respondent-Management should maintain a register and engage
the workman when the season starts in the succeeding years in the order ofseniority.
Until all the employees whose names appear inthe list are engaged in addition
to the employees who are already working, the management should not goin forfresh
engagement of new workmen It would be encumbent uponthe respondent management
to adoptsuch procedure as isenumerated above.
The appealis
accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Back
