The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for compliance with statutory remedies provided by labor enactments, emphasizing the need for notice, a reasonable cause for termination, and the necessity of conducting an inquiry supported by satisfactory evidence.

1. The writ petition is filed by a trade union of employees engaged by respondents TASMAC. They have come forward to challenge the Service Rules framed by the respondent TASMAC with reference to the employees engaged by them. The union is aggrieved by Rule 11, which reads as follows:

11.TERMINATION OF SERVICES: In the event of the Corporation not having any further need of any employees services, the appointing authority can dispense with the services of an employee as follows:-

(i) in the case of a temporary employee with immediate notice of termination.

(ii) in the case of probationer and regular employees of Class IV, 30 days notice or salary in lieu thereof.

(iii) in the case of a regular member of staff other than Class IV, 90 days notice or salary in lieu thereof.

The decision of the Corporation will be final in this respect and shall not be questioned by the employee.

Provided that nothing in these regulations will affect the right of the Corporation to dismiss or remove from service any employee for neglect of duty or for misconduct without notice or salary in lieu thereof.

According to the petitioner Union, the Rules are arbitrary and unconstitutional.

2. This Court in B.Sivakumar v. The Managing Director, TASMAC Ltd. in W.P.No.6304 of 2009 dated 15.03.2010, in paragraphs 6 to 12 held as follows:

"6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was bound by the terms of appointment and the Rules provided therein and there was no obligation to conduct any enquiry under the said Rules.

7. This Court is unable to agree with the said contention. Undoubtedly, the activity of the respondent/Corporation is selling liquor through various retail shops and the said work can be held to be a commercial establishment coming within the definition of Section 2 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947. Under the said Act, the services of an employee, who is employed for more than six months, cannot be dispensed with unless one months notice or wages in lieu of such notice are provided and he can be terminated only for a reasonable cause. Such notice and assigning of reasonable cause are unnecessary if his services are dispensed with on a charge of misconduct supported by satisfactory evidence recorded at an inquiry held for the purpose. Therefore, the relevant Act makes it obligatory for the respondent/ Corporation to conduct an enquiry, in which there must be satisfactory evidence. Though the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 provides for an appeal under Section 41(2), it is not known as to why the petitioner has not availed the appeal remedy provided which is not only cost effective, but more advantageous to the employees.

8. Apart from this fact, under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, "industrial establishment" has been defined under Section 2(e).As per Section 2(e)(i) of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, "industrial establishment" includes an industrial establishment as defined in clause (ii) of Section 2 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. By a State amendment introduced under Section 2(ii)(h) by Tamil Nadu Act 9 of 1959, under Section 2(ii)(h) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, it has been provided that it includes an establishment or undertaking which the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be an industrial establishment for the purposes of the Act.

9. By virtue of the said power conferred under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 through the State amendment, the State Government by a notification made in G.O.Ms.No.78, Labour and Employment Department, dated 26.6.1996 has extended the provisions of the Payment of Wages Actto all the shops and commercial establishments employing twenty or more persons. Therefore, by virtue of this notification, the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 are applicable to the respondent/Corporation.

10. By virtue