Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act does not empower the employer to make deductions from the employee's dues.

IMMANENI PANDURANGA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed challenging the correctness of the order of the Additional Labour Court Hyderabad dated 23-5-88 in M P No. 297 of 1986 which is an application filed under section 33 C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (for short "the Act. ")

( 2 ) THE second respondent was employed in the shop of the petitioner as a Gumastha, The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that that shop was closed in 1982 due to death of the original owner Maduri Easwariah and that at that time, the second respondent was paid all the benefits due to him including gratuity. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that subsequently the shop was revived by the brother s son of late Maduri Easwariah and thereafter the services of the second respondent were requisitioned : that while in service the second respondent has taken a loan of Rs. 6 000/- and that when the petitioner wanted to recover the loan amount by making deductions from the secend respondent s salary the second respondent has absconded from service from March 1986.

( 3 ) THE learned Presiding Officer of the Additional Labour Court upheld the contention of the petitioner regarding voluntary abandonment of service by the second respondent, Consequently the learned Presiding Officer disallowed the claim of the second respondent for retrenchment compensation. But the learned presiding Officer however directed payment of notice pay of Rs. 425/- and gratuity of Rs. 9 775/~ making a total of rs. 10 200/ -.

( 4 ) AGGRIEVED by the said decision the employer has filed this writ petition.

( 5 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the second respondent is due in a sum of Rs. 6 000/- to the employer (petitioner) which was taken by him by way of loan and that the learned Presiding Officer erged in not deducting that amount from the amount due to the employee. He, further submitted that the services of the second respondent were terminated in. . . . . . 1982 due to the closure of the shop and subsequently, he was reinstated in service in 1983 after the petitioner s shop was revived and hence the labour court erred in awarding gratuity on the basis of the total length of service of 45 years.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel for the second respondent on the other hand submitted that the second respondent was in continuous service of the petitioner for 45 years and there is absolutely no evidence let in before the Labour court that the services of the second respondent were terminated in 1982 or 1983 and that the terminal benefits were given to him. It is seen from the record that the second respendent has issued a notice dated 19-8-86 to the petitioner demanding his terminal benefits but the petitioner has not issued any reply to that notice. No evidence is let in either, oral or documentary to substantiate the contention that the services of the second respondent were terminated and that terminal benefits were paid to him in 1982 or 1983 and he was subsequently taken into service in 1983. I therefore, hold that the learned Presiding Officer did not commit any mistake in taking the total length of service of 45 years and awarding gratuity of Rs. 9 975/ -. The learned Presiding Officer has also ordered payment of Rs. 425/- towards notice pay.

( 7 ) ANOTHER submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the second respondent has taken a loan of Rs, 6 000/- and that the learned presiding Officer of the Labour court has committed an error in not deducting that amount while awarding the amount due to the second respondent. The learned presiding Officer negatived the claim of the petitioner on the ground that there is no provision in the Act to claim set off as it is available in the Code of Civil procedure and therefore it is not open to the Labour Court to make such a deduction. Section 33-C of the Act provides for recovery of money due from an employer. Sub-clause (2) of Section 33-C provides that where an

Click Here to Read the rest of this document