ORDER :

Petitioner has come up with this Writ Petition challenging the Award dated 30.09.2019 made in I.D.No.48 of 2018 by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court and the 2nd Respondent's order in No.A8/15055/90/M, dated 18.04.1991, and for a consequential direction to the Respondents to release the terminal benefits with all attendant benefits.

2. According to the Petitioner, he was appointed as Fireman in the Marine Division, Chennai Port Trust on 06.11.1972. He was initially promoted as Fireman Grade – I on 05.05.1981 and later promoted as Fireman Driver on 17.02.1984. Owing to his wife's ill health, the Petitioner was forced to apply leave in November 1989 and he went on leave. He further stated that, his leave application was neither accepted nor rejected by the administration. However, after his continuous request, the Petitioner came to know that, he was terminated from service with effect from 03.11.1990. But, before passing the order of termination, no intimation was given to him and no enquiry was conducted.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and perused the material documents available on record.

4. The undisputed fact is that, the Petitioner was terminated from service with effect from 03.11.1990. The Petitioner has moved the Conciliation Officer in February 2017 only. However, the conciliation could not be completed and the period of 45 days as contemplated under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, expired on 24.03.2017. Thereafter, the Petitioner approached the Labour Court by filing a Petition under Section 2-A of the Act and the Management disputed the fact that, it is barred by limitation.

5. For better appreciation, Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, w.e.f. 01.12.1965, is extracted hereunder:

2A. Dismissal, etc., of an individual workman to be deemed to be an industrial dispute.— Where any employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches, or otherwise terminates the services of an individual workman, any dispute or difference between that workman and his employer connected with, or arising out of, such discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other workman nor any union of workmen is a party to the dispute.

6. In 1988, there was an amendment to Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the amended one is extracted below:

“By Tamil Nadu Act 5 of 1988, the following amendments have been made:

Amendment of Section 2A, Central Act XIV of 1947 – In the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act XIV of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), Section 2-A shall be re-numbered as sub-section (1) of that section and after the said sub-section (1) as so re-numbered, the following sub-section shall be added, namely: -

(2) Where no settlement is arrived at in the course of any conciliation proceeding taken under this Act in regard to an industrial dispute referred to in subsection (1), the aggrieved individual workman may apply in the prescribed manner, to the Labour Court for adjudication of such dispute and the Labour Court shall proceed to adjudicate such dispute, as if such dispute has been referred to it for adjudication and accordingly all the provisions of this Act relating to adjudication of industrial disputes by the Labour Court shall apply to such adjudication.”

7. According to the Respondent/Management, the Petitioner has approached the Authority 45 days after the failure of the conciliation on the presumption that, three years period runs from the date of making an Application to the Conciliation Officer and not from the date of actual date of termination. Even though the Petitioner was discharged from service as early as on 03.11.1990, the amendment of the Industrial Disputes Act came into force only on 16.09.2010. For better appreciation, the amended provision of Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2010, is extracted below:

“Amendment of Section 2A. - Se