JUDGMENT - R.A. JAHAGIRDAR, J.:---This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India raises a question relating to the interpretation of the word 'employee' to be found in section 3(13) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act. The circumstances in which this question arises ought to be stated.

2. The first respondent, hereinafter referred to as "the respondent", joined the petitioner-company hereinafter referred to as "the company" as a Camera Operator on 1st of October, 1968. The respondent was promoted to the post of Departmental Assistant and ten years later in year 1978 he was further promoted to the post of Junior Assistant Master. Above him, there are two more posts, namely those of Senior Master and Engraving Master. Thus the respondent occupied a middle position in the hierarchy in this department which is called the Screen Making Department. On 28th of January, 1982, his services were terminated with immediate effect on tendering him salary for one month in lieu of notice. The salary which was offered to him was Rs. 2,157.92. This is the consolidated salary, which included the dearness allowances. Elsewhere in evidence it is noticed that the Basic salar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document