Non-allotment of duty with salary is not malafide.

V.S. SIRPURKAR, J.

This Judgment shall govern W.A. Nos. 77 of 1997 and 78 of 1997, which arose out of the common order passed by the Labour Court. The learned single Judge has also passed a common order in respect of both. The first Writ Appeal is in respect of the reference made, while the second pertains to the order passed by the Labour Court under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

Feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge of this Court, confirming the award passed by the first respondent/Labour Court, the appellant/employer, Company comes before us by way of these Appeals. In the aforementioned Award, the Labour Court has held that the order transferring the second respondent herein Thiru N. D. Talson from Coonoor to Madurai dated July 30, 1982 is illegal. The Labour Court has also decided the application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, filed by the worker in his favour, and awarded a sum of Rs. 496.80 as the money value of the benefits claimed. The reference came to be made on account of the failure of the conciliation proceedings in-between the workman and the employer. It is an admitted position that at the relevant time in the year 1982, the said workman was working as a Driver and was posted in Coonoor. It is the claim of the worker that he was also an Executive Member of the Union. He was transferred by the aforementioned order with effect from August 16, 1982. However, he sought for 15 days time to join the Madurai Office, for which he was granted 7 days time, and he was permitted to report for the duty on August 23, 1982. However, he sought time from August 23, 1982 to September 3, 1982 by his application dated August 20, 1982, and also sought for the reconsideration of the order by his communication dated August 22, 1982. However, on being served a notice by the management directing him to join the duty in without fail, he also alleged by a letter dated August 25, 1982 that his transfer was with ulterior motive and the object of victimising him. He again sent a request by letter dated September 1, 1982 to repost him in the Coonoor Estate. In the meantime on August 31, 1982, the Union raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Officer and while conciliation proceedings were pending, the management issued a notice dated November 16, 1982, directing the workman to vacate the quarters. There are letters on record on this subject. However, the fact remains that admittedly on August 4, 1982, the said workman joined his duty. It is his claim that for 16 months, he was kept idle without giving any duties, but was paid his full salaries and allowances. His case as pleaded before the Labour Court was that there was no necessity for his being transferred, as there was no lorry available at Madurai for driving and the transfer was only with an object to teach him a lesson, because, he had joined the Union and was its office bearer. He also pleaded that since he was a worker, he could not be transferred from Coonoor to Madurai, as the workers' transfer was prohibited by the Standing Orders of the Government.The employer-Company took the stand that the Company has its registered Office at Madurai and the Estate owned by it is in the Nilgiris which is called Golden Hills Estates (P) Ltd. It was pointed out by the company that firstly, the second respondent was not a workman, but was a member of the staff, and that as such his transfer was possible under the Standing Orders. They later on pleaded that since they felt that the services of the second respondent could be better utilised as a Driver in the Madurai Office, and since they intended to Purchase a lorry they had transferred him, who was only a Driver. They also pointed out that the driver's duty could be utilised anywhere in the Company's Estates or even at the Headquarters of the Company at Madurai. They pointed out that as per the Standing Order 14, the employer-Company had a right to transfer him. They