Co.operative Spinning Mills Ltd. vs The Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories and M. Eswaran

P. Sathasivam, J.—Considering the limited issue raised, the main writ appeal itself is taken up for disposal.

It is seen that the Competent Authority, viz., the first respondent herein, on verification of the records, passed an order holding that the second

respondent herein, viz., M. Eswaran has put in 515 days service in 24 calendar months from January, 1993 to December, 19 94, in the appellant

Co-operative Spinning Mills. The learned Judge, taking note of the direction of the competent authority, based on factual details, vacated the stay

obtained by the Management. Questioning the same, the Mill has preferred the present writ appeal.

Mr. J.R.K. Bhavanantham, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that inasmuch as the appellant Mill is closed with effect from

30.06.2003, the direction of the Competent Authority cannot be implemented. He also contended that the first respondent, who issued direction

declaring the second respondent as eligible, is not a competent authority to pass such order. The impugned order shows that the learned Judge,

after taking note of both the aspects and after finding that in the event of any settlement, the second respondent would be entitled to claim benefits,

vacated the stay. It is also brought to our notice that even after the closure, based on the representation of the Mill, the Government sanctioned

funds and the same was distributed to the permanent employees as a relief. In such circumstances, and in view of the conclusion of the authority in

so far as the second respondent herein, as rightly observed by the learned Judge, by vacating the stay he would be in a position to claim any

benefit, if the same is available, in the event of settlement arrived between the workman and the Management. The other question that the first

respondent herein is not competent to order conferment, we are of the view that the same can be considered while taking up the main writ petition.

Inasmuch as the learned Judge has exercised his discretion on the basis of the materials placed, we find that no valid ground to interfere with the

said order. On this ground, the writ appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also

dismissed.