The Commissioner v. P.Balasubramanian
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 16-10-2019 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.22748 of 2004 And W.M.P.No.27509 of 2004 The Commissioner, Salem Municipal Corporation, ..Petitioner vs 1.P.Balasubramanian 2.M.Kaveri 3.Manickam 4.Shanthi 5.V.Murugan 6.Deivanai 7.Sumathi 8.M.Jaishankar 9.Chellappan 10.Padma 11.Dhanam 12.Kamaraj 13.Chandran 14.Natesan 15.Palaniammal 16.Perumayee 17.P.Uma 18.P.Krishnan 19.Pothammal 20.K.Mariappan 21.Loganathan 22.V.Saravanan 23.Sarasu 24.P.Madurai 25.Arjunan 26.P.Selvam 27.R.Jeyaraj 28.K.Karthigeyan 29.M.Muthusamy 30.Rajathi 31.Govindarajan 32.Senthamarai 33.Muthumani
34.Kanniammal 35.Amutha 36.R.Latha 37.Palanisamy 38.R.Sellammal 39.P.Ramasamy 40.P.Sathiamurthy 41.Mani 42.P.Karuppannan 43.Madeswari 44.Selvaraj 45.R.Easwaran 46.Parimala 47.Vengaiyan 48.Naachayee 49.Murugan 50.K.Govindaraj 51.P.Selvam 52.R.Murugesan 53.Poongodi 54.Sankaran 55.Thilagam 56.Selvaraj 57.M.Palaniappan 58.M.Murthy 59.Kanniammal 60.Mala 61.K.Ravi 62.Amaravathy 63.Rajeswari 64.Kannammal 65.Packiam 66.Rani 67.Mariammal 68.Pappathy 69.Valli 70.Vijaya 71.Tharamathy 72.Vijaya 73.Amirtham 74.Thangammal 75.Sellammal 76.Shanthi 77.Madammal 78.Chandra 79.Rajammal 80.Sasikala 81.Srinivasan 82.Rajendran 83.Rani
84.Nagaraj 85.Palaniammal 86.Rajammal 87.Mahesh 88.Palaniammal 89.Padmavathy 90.Venkatesan 91.Selvaraj 92.Lakshmanan 93.Saroja 94.Parvathy 95.Sengodan 96.Shanthi 97.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, .. Respondents (Respondents 1 to 96 are rep by their Power Agent S. Mani Labour Representative Thirukumaran Building Four Roads Salem-9) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order of the Labour Court, Salem, dated 25.11.2003 in I.D. Nos.116 of 2001 to 159 of 2001, I.D.Nos.314 of 2001 to 333 of 2001 and I.D. Nos.208 of 2002 to 254 of 2002 and quash the same in so far as it directs the respondents 1 to 96 to make reference to the Labour Court as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sankaran For Respondents-1to96 : Mr.S.Ayyadurai For Respondent-97 : Labour Court
O R D E R
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner made a submission that respondentsworkmen are allowed to continue in service, their services were also brought under the regular establishment and their services are regularised in the Regular Time Scale of Pay.
2. This being the factum, the grievances of the respondents had already been redressed. Thus, no further adjudication needs to be entertained in respect of the grounds raised in the present writ petition.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
-s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar Svn To 1.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 2.The Commissioner, Salem Municipal Corporation, +1 CC to Mr.G.Sankaran, Advocate sr 87067.
W.P.No.22748 of 2004 RGN(CO) SP(27/11/2019)