ORDER
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.
1. The above writ petition is filed questioning the order of the Labour Court made in C.P.No.87 of 1995, dated December 29, 1995.
2. The crux of the matter in issue in this case is the interpretation of one of the clauses with regard to compensation in the voluntary retirement scheme, which has been disputed by the respondents herein, who went out of service of the petitioner-management under voluntary retirement scheme.
3. In the voluntary retirement scheme it is
stated that the workmen would be paid
retrenchment compensation as follows:
“(a) Average of the full wages drawn for the last three months shall be taken and 15 days’ average wages shall be paid for every completed year of service as retrenchment compensation.”
The other conditions attached to the voluntary retirement scheme are not relevant for the purpose of this case. This clause has been interpreted by the management that 15 days’ salary has to be calculated for a month (for thirty days). On the contrary, it is the contention of the workers that 15 days salary has to be calculated out of 26 working days.
Though in respect of payment of gratuity under the voluntary retirement scheme it has been specifically stated that 15 days would be calculated out of 26 days with regard to compensation no such specification has been made, it is only stated 15 days average wages for a month would be paid. Hence an analogous provision in Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act has been taken into consideration by the Labour Court and on that basis of the said provision, which has been considered in the decision in Trade Wings Ltd. v. Prabhakar-Dattaram Phodkar and Ors. 1993-III-LLJ (Suppl)-299 (Bom), the Labour Court has passed an award to the effect that the compensation has to be calculated for 15 days out of 26 days for every completed year of service. That order is put in issue in the present writ petition.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner unit has been closed down as it was sustaining heavy loss consecutively and hence any order; confirming the order passed by the Labour Court would have a serious bearing on the management and contended that as per the condition attached to the voluntary retirement scheme 15 days salary for every completed year of service has to be calculated out of 30 days in a month not as 26 days in a month.
5. Even though, learned counsel for the petitioner argued as stated above he is not able to sustain his case in the face of the very language employed in Clause 1 of the conditions attached to the voluntary retirement scheme and also in the light of the law laid down by this Court in the decision in Management of Shadlow India Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Qourt 2000-II-LLJ-208 (Mad). There is absolutely no reason as to why the retrenchment compensation has to be calculated in a manner which is disadvantageous to the workman rather than the one provided in the statute, i. e., Section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act. This is what the position in Management of Shadlow India Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court (supra), wherein it has been held that the retrenchment compensation should be computed for 15 days average pay. The average monthly pay should be divided by 26 to arrive at the wages per day.
6. Hence, I am of the view that there is absolutely no irregularity in the order made by the Labour Court in the C.P.No. 87 of 1995, dated December 29, 1995, which requires no interference from this Court.
7. In the, result the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous is also dismissed. No costs.