IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 18520 of 2008(D) -------------------------- ID.20/2007 of INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ---------------- SMT.T.V.JAMEELA, W/O.T.V.MUHAMMED, KAITHAVALAPPIL VEEDU, THAZHEPALAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM (D.T). BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. P.VELAYUDHAN KUTTY, PONNARATH VEEDU, THEYYALINGAL P.O., TANUR, MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, MALAPPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, (LABOUR DEPARTMENT), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH W.P.(C)NO.18524 OF 2008 AND CONNECTED CASES ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)Nos.18520, 18524, 18525 & 18618 OF 200 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT In all these writ petitions, the petitioner is challenging awards of the Industrial Tribunal, Palakkad in an industrial dispute raised by four employees of the petitioner's establishment, in which justifiability of denial of employment of those workers were the issues involved in all the industrial disputes. The Industrial Tribunal came to the conclusion that the concerned workmen were denied employment unjustly, but taking into account the admitted fact that the establishment was closed, the Tribunal directed the petitioner's establishment to pay closure compensation at the rate of one month’s wages on the basis of the minimum wages notified for the industry. Those awards are under challenge in these writ petitions at the instance of the petitioner's establishment. As far as the question of justifiability of denial of employment is concerned, the Tribunal has given elaborate W.P.(c)No.18520/08&con.cases 2 reasons for coming to its conclusion. On analyzing the reasons given by the petitioner's establishment, I do not find any perversity whatsoever in the same. As far as the relief granted is concerned, once the establishment is closed, the management is bound to pay closure compensation and gratuity which would come to one month’s wages for every year of completed service. There is nothing wrong in adopting minimum wages for the purpose of calculation of compensation and gratuity also. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned awards and accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.18520/08&con.cases 3