CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has upheld an order of the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai, in 2008, holding that the sale of the sugar factory of Nava Bharat Ferro Alloys Limited at Pugalur to EID Parry India Limited, as a genuine transaction and ordering ‘re-employment’ of workmen of the erstwhile company with effect from December 1, 2008.
Justice V Parthiban upheld the tribunal’s order while dismissing a batch of writ petitions from the management of EID Parry and various workers unions challenging the award.
“This court is of the view that the award passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any infirmity or irregularity calling for interference of this court”, the judge said.
Originally, pursuant to an agreement, Nava Bharat sold its sugar mill unit at Pugalur to EID Parry. While doing so, it terminated the services of workmen after settling all the amounts due to them, including compensation. After taking over the company, EID Parry recruited its own employees and had also offered fresh employment to more than 190 workmen originally employed by Nava Bharat.
Aggrieved by the transfer of ownership and resultant non-employment, the workmen raised an issue before the tribunal, which had held that the sale was genuine and the same was not sham. It had also ordered the ‘re-employment’ of the erstwhile workmen. Aggrieved over the direction for re-employment, the management and workers unions filed the present petitions.
DMK files copy of OPS affidavit before EC
Causing an embarassment to the ruling AIADMK, the DMK on Tuesday produced before the Madras High Court a copy of the affidavit filed by Deputy Chief Minister O Panneerselvam before the Election Commission (EC), to prove its allegation that OPS and 10 other MLAs had indeed voted against the motion of confidence moved by Chief Minister Edappadi K Palaniswamy on February 18 last year, in violation of the directives of party chief whip.
Nalini seeks premature release; opposes ‘double stand’
S Nalini, a life convict in the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case has moved the High Court again seeking premature release. There cannot be two different treatments for a single class of life convicts, when it comes to premature release, she contended. The petitioner opposed a Section that mandates the State to consult the Centre to remit or commute a sentence, where the sentence is for an offence which was investigated by the CBI.