A worker employed continuously for over seven years, despite being labeled a trainee, is entitled to protections and benefits of permanent employment under labour laws, and termination without compliance with statutory requirements is illegal.

ORDER

Today, this writ petition is listed under captin for 'Further hearing' at the instances of the respondents, and upon hearing the arguments advanced by both sides, the following order is passed.

The captioned writ petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, assailing the order dated 09.02.2023 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in I.D. No. 134 of 2011. By the said order, the Industrial Dispute raised by the writ petitioner under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 came to be dismissed.

2. The petitioner asserts that he possesses an ITI Certificate and that on 05.11.2002, he was employed in the respondent’s factory as an Act Apprentice for a period of one year, which came to an end on 04.11.2003. Thereafter, he was appointed as a trainee on 01.12.2003, though no training was ever imparted to him. Instead, he performed all duties akin to those of a permanent workman. He was engaged as a Machine Operator and was initially paid wages of Rs. 2,575/- per month.

3. In the course of employment, the petitioner was transferred to the respondent’s factory unit at Sembrampakkam, and while he was working at the Mannapakkam factory, his services were terminated on 17.01.2011, the pretext that his training period was to come to an end on 17.01.2011. He was consequently denied employment with effect from the said date. The petitioner contends that he was in continuous employment with the respondent from 01.12.2003 to 17.01.2011, i.e., for a period of about eight years, and therefore, he is entitled to the benefits and protection available under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981.

4. It is further contended that his engagement as a trainee was only a camouflage to deny him the status and benefits of a permanent workman. Consequently, the termination of his services is arbitrary, illegal, and in clear violation of Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

5. Aggrieved by such termination, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Officer (Conciliation), Sriperumbudur. The conciliation proceedings ended in failure, and the Conciliation Officer submitted a failure report dated 05.06.2013. Having no alternative remedy, the petitioner thereafter approached the Labour Court by filing a claim under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

6. The Labour Court framed six issues for consideration. To substantiate his case, the petitioner examined himself as WW1 and produced 42 documents marked as Ex.W1 to Ex.W42. On the other hand, the respondent management examined one witness as MW1 and produced 20 documents marked as Ex.M1 to Ex.M20. Upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Labour Court held that (i) the dispute raised by the writ petitioner was barred by limitation, (ii) there existed employer-employee relationship between the petitioner and the respondent, and (iii) the petitioner’s engagement came to an end by efflux of time as he was appointed as a trainee. Being aggrieved by the said findings, the present writ petition has been filed.

7. Mr. P.R. Thiruneelakandan, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, submitted that the industrial dispute was raised well within the period of limitation prescribed under law. However, the Labour Court, by erroneously construing the provisions of Section 2A(2) as amended by the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act, 1988, held that the dispute was barred by limitation, which finding, according to him, is patently untenable.

8. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner further submitted that the documents marked as Ex.W1 to Ex.W36 unequivocally demonstrate that the petitioner was not a trainee, but was continuously working as a regular Machine Operator