The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Labour Court order awarding arrears of wages. The court held that a teacher performing supervisory work in an industrial training centre qualifies as a workman entitled to relief under Section 33C(2).
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933
WP(C).No. 12316 of 2005(N)
----------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S): -------------------------
SOBHA INDUSTRIAL TRAINING CENTRE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, K.R.PURAM P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR SRI.T.K.RAJESHKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. K.S.JALAJA DEVI ALIAS JALAJA CHANDRAN, VALIAKULATHINKAL, AROOR P.O., AROOR MURI, AROOR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
3. THE LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM.
R1 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.SANEER R2 BY ADV. DR.V.N.SANKARJEE SRI.HARISREE VELIAKULTHINKAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C)NO.12316/2005
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO.JUDGE
sts
B.P. RAY, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 12316 of 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011.
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.
1152/- which is much less than the minimum wages fixed by the Government of Kerala. The 2<sup>nd</sup> respondent filed a Claim Petition as C.P. No. 22 of 2002 before the Labour Court, Kollam claiming 1,01,200.50 as arrears of wages. The Labour Court, Kollam as per order dated 10.12.2004 allowed the said petition directing the petitioner herein to pay an amount of `1,01,200.50 to the 2nd respondent. It is the said order which is assailed in this petition.W.P.(C). No.12316/2005
-:2:-
“It is the contention of the petitioner that he is not the employer of the institute and that he is only the Principal of the Industrial Training Centre where the first respondent is employed as instructor. It is also contended that the first respondent being a teacher, does not come under the provisions of the Act so as to claim subsistence allowance through the second respondent. I am afraid both contentions cannot be appreciated. Under Section 2(b) of the Act employer defined as the owner of an establishment and includes any person responsible to the owner for supervision and control of the establishment. As far as the training centre is concerned, the petitioner in his capacity as the Principal is responsible to the owner who according to the petitioner is a Trust for the supervision and control. As far as the second contention is concerned, it is seen from Ext.R1(a) experience certificate issued by the petitioner that the first respondent has been working in the institute as an Electrical Instructoress. In the decision of this Court reported in St. George I.T. Centre v. Goorge K. John (1989(1) KLT 132) it has been held that a skilled instructor in an industrial training unit who discharges the work of a technical and supervisory nature cannot be excluded from the definition of an employee under the Act.”
Following the aforesaid decision, the matter has attained
finality. Therefore, I am of the considered view that the
W.P.(C). No.12316/2005
-:3:-
contention of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent is not a workman within the meaning of the Act, cannot be sustained. I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.
rv
W.P.(C). No.12316/2005
-:4:-
B.P. RAY, J.
O.P.No. 13887 of 2002
Dated this the 16th day of November, 2011.
JUDGMENT
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a teacher works as instruction in an industrial training centre can claim arrears of wages under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Whether the petitioner is an educational institution or an employer of workmen within the meaning of the Act.
SOBHA INDUSTRIAL TRAINING CENTRE
STATE OF KERALA
K.S.JALAJA DEVI ALIAS JALAJA CHANDRAN
THE LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM
B.P. RAY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court