The Management v. R.Annapoorani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.Nos.33825, 33827, 33831, 33833, 33836 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.36644 to 36647, 36657, 36652, 36654, 36656, 36651, 36655 of W.P.No.33825 of 2024 The Management, TP Special 30 Jameen Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society, Rep. by its Secretary, Vs.
R.Annapoorani ... Respondent 30.01.2024 made in Computation Petition No. 9 of 2023 on the file of 1/7
W.P.No. 33827 of 2024 The Management, TP Special 30 Jameen Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society, Rep. by its Secretary, Vs M.Bagyalakshmi ... Respondent 30.01.2024 made in Computation Petition No. 13 of 2023 on the file of W.P.No. 33831 of 2024 The Management, TP Special 30 Jameen Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society, Rep. by its Secretary, Vs 1.B. Balasaraswathi 2.Jayashakthivel 2/7
3.Vasanthkumar ... Respondents 30.01.2024 made in Computation Petition No. 10 of 2023 on the file of W.P.No. 33833 of 2024 The Management, TP Special 30 Jameen Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society, Rep. by its Secretary, Vs D.Poongothai ... Respondent 30.01.2024 made in Computation Petition No. 14 of 2023 on the file of W.P.No. 33836 of 2024 The Management, TP Special 30 Jameen Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society, Rep. by its Secretary, 3/7
Vs S. Balasaraswathi ... Respondent 30.01.2024 made in Computation Petition No. 11 of 2023 on the file of For all W.Ps.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Saravana Sowmiyan COMMON ORDER These writ petitions are connected to each other and as such are taken up by way of this common order for disposal.
2. In all these matters, the orders passed in the Computation Petitions by the Additional Labour Court, Coimbatore in respect of five workmen is being challenged. The workmen filed the Computation Petition claiming the arrears of provident fund amount and also earned leave. The claim was resisted by the petitioner management on the ground that they are not at all 4/7
workmen and secondly straight away the petition under 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be entertained, since the claim itself is disputed.
3. The Labour Court found that these workmen entered into service as Salesman and retired as Sales Executive. Nothing was placed before the Labour Court to substantiate that either they were in a supervisory or managerial capacity and therefore, they are workmen within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act.
4. This apart, the Labour Court found that the quantum of Provident Fund amount is already mentioned in the audit report of the management itself and the said audit report is not even disputed by the petitioner management. In view thereof, the second contention that the claim is disputed cannot also be substantiated.
5. Mr.P.Saravana Sowmiyan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner Management would submit that even otherwise the Labour Court ought to have taken into account the financial position of the petitioner management. Only pursuant to the policies of the Government, the Cooperative Credit Society had written off the loans and therefore, there is no 5/7
money left with the petitioner management unless the same is sanctioned by the Government.
6. Be that as it may, the same will not preclude the appropriate authority from passing the orders under the Computation Petition and its execution. However, considering the genuine request which is made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the copy of this order shall also be forwarded by the petitioner management to the appropriate authority of the Government of Tamil Nadu who shall ensure timely release of the amount so as to enable the petitioner management to comply with the Awards.
7. With the above observation, finding no merits, these writ petitions stand disposed off. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No cost.
21.11.2024 nsl 6/7
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl W.P.Nos.33825, 33827, 33831, 33833, 33836 of 2024 21.11.2024 7/7