IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.P. No. of 2018

M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd

No. 85, Sidel Tower,
Opp. WCC College, WCC Road,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District-629001
Represented by its authorized representative,
Umaa Sathish Kanth M, S/o, Munuswamy N

…Petitioner
-Versus-

M.Antony Dhass,
No.12/54, Mary’s Cottage,
Muthuraman Kovil Road,
Thickanamcode,
Kanyakumari District – 629 804.
…Respondent

AFFIDAVIT OF UMMA SATHISH KANTH M.

I, Umaa Sathish Kanth M, S/o, Munuswamy N, Hindu, aged about 39

years, working as Chief Branch Manager, M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life

Insurance Company Ltd, the Petitioner herein having office at Bajaj

Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd, B Wing, 4th Floor, Old No:276 &

277 N,No. 497 & 498, Poonamalle High Road Arumbakkam, Chennai -

600106, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:-

1. I am the authorized representative of the Petitioner herein and well

conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. I submit that M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd., the

Petitioner, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act,1956

and registered under and in terms of the Insurance Act, 1938 and the

Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) Act, 1999 to

carry out the business of life insurance. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance is

1
 a well-respected brand in the Insurance sector and is renowned for its

customer-oriented services and products, ensuring that the life goals

of our customers are done and achieved. Further, we are known for

our safe, secure and employee friendly environment. Offering both

work- life balance satisfaction.

3. I state that the present Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner to set

aside the Award dated 05.11.2015 passed in I.D.No.43 of 2014 before

the Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum- Labour Court,

Chennai, inter alia, stating “ The Respondent (Petitioner herein) are

directed to reinstate the Petitioner (2nd Respondent herein) in service

with 50% backwages and others attendant benefits within a month of

the publication of the Award in default of payment of Backwages within

time it would carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the

award”. Before going into the grounds of the Petition, the facts leading

to aforesaid Award are stated hereunder.

4. I submit that the Respondent was deputed by one of the Petitioner’s

consultants, M/s. Ma Foi Managament Consultants Ltd., a company

registered under Companies Act, 1956. The Respondent was an

employee of M/s. Ma Foi Management Consultants Ltd., prior to his

employment with the Petitioner Company and had been deputed by

them to work at the premises of the Petitioner Company.

5. I submit that the Respondent was appointed in the Petitioner company

by an Appointment Letter dated 22.04.2006. He had acknowledged

and accepted that he had gone through all the terms and conditions

mentioned in the Petitioner company offer letter/ appointment letter

and agreed that the terms shall bind him. The Respondent joined duty

2
 in the post of “Customer Support Executive” in Grade L1-B in the

Petitioner company i.e., Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited

at Nagercoil Branch Office on 1st June 2006.

6. I further submit that as per the “Job Description” provided in the

Appointment letter dated 22.04.2006 of the Respondent, the normal

work for his designation consists of the duties assigned to him from

time to time, he may be called upon to discharge any duties which in

the opinion of the Petitioner company are within capacity and he is

duty bound to discharge those duties with diligence and care.

7. I submit that the Respondent after having gone through the terms and

conditions mentioned in the appointment letter joined the Petitioner

Company at Nagercoil branch. The Respondent’s employment was

confirmed by the Petitioner vide Employment Confirmation letter dated

26.03.2007, as “Customer Support Executive” with effect from

01.12.2006. So the Employment Confirmation of the respondent in the

Petitioner Company was effective from 01.12.2006 onwards.

8. I submit that the respondent from the beginning, blatantly refused to

complete work allocated to him, i.e., to make telephonic calls to the

policy holders of the company for their renewal of their Insurance

Policies. When an explanation was sought from the respondent, he

had repeatedly ignored emails sent to his individual official email id,

from his superiors and had responded only after he had been

contacted in person. He had stated that it was not his duty to call, as

it is not a part of his job profile, which is contradictory to the fact that

policy holder retention is a part of his Operation Job Profile. The

respondent had thus violated the terms mentioned in the clause “Job

Description” of his Appointment letter.

3
9. I submit that the Respondent had been forwarding official emails and

communications which had been classified as “Internal” to external

email ids, which is in direct violation of the appointment letter as well

as the company’s IT Security Policy. The Respondent had failed to

abide and comply with the Petitioner Company’s rules and regulations,

and also violated the confidentiality clause, of the company. As this is

complete violation of the said clause and against the Petitioner’s

Information Technology Security Policy and administrative procedures.

10. I further submit that the Petitioner issued a STERN WARNING letter

dated 01.06.2010 to the Respondent that any or such acts or lapses

on his part mentioned above shall not be tolerated by the Petitioner in

future, and shall be strictly dealt with by the Company. But even after

this stern warning, the respondent failed to do the work allotted to

him. Repeated emails was forwarded to him in not obliging his duties

but the Respondent did not pay head to the higher officials nor did he

follow his duties as an employee of the Petitioner Company.

11. I submit that as per the work exigency, the Respondent’s services

were transferred from Petitioner’s Nagercoil office to Team Life Care

Company India Pvt. Ltd. (“TLC”), Trichy Off-Site location. The transfer

letter dated 02.09.2010 was issued by the Petitioner to the

respondent. In reply to the said transfer order, on 03.09.2010 the

Respondent sent an Electronic Mail to the Petitioner’s representatives

stating “As per the below mail I am not accepting this transfer letter also

not willing to get transferred outside Kanyakumari district.”

12. I submit that clause “Location” in the Appointment letter dated

22.04.2006 states as follows: “the Company reserves the right to

4
 transfer him to any other location where the Company has office or

newly established office as per the requirements of the Company. His

services are transferable at short notice, to any department or to any

Office, Branch, division of this Company or in any subsidiary of this

Company or your services may be seconded you to any other Company

or any other place where work of the Company is carried out, as may be

necessary.”. Therefore transfer of service was one of the conditions of

appointment and the Petitioner Company reserves the right to transfer

the Respondent to any other location at short notice during the

employment period.

13. I further submit that the respondent was given Transfer benefits,

which he was eligible in view of his transfer. The Transfer benefits, as

per the Human-Resource Policy of the Petitioner are:–

1. Disturbance allowance (1 month’s basic pay or Rs. 25,000/-

whichever is less)

2. Relocation expenses (travel and packing and forwarding)

3. Hotel stay for 7 days

It is pertinent to note that the respondent refused his transfer the

very next day, without even making a cursory visit to his new location.

I submit that the M/s. Team Life Care Company Pvt. Ltd. is a channel

partner with the Petitioner and has entered into a Infrastructure

Facility Agreement dated 26.11.2009 for the providing office spaces

and premises to the Petitioner Company for a consideration. The

Respondent was transferred to one such Off-site premise provided by

TLC in Trichy. The Respondent, without enquiring about the nature of

the transfer, blatantly refused the transfer order. I submit that the

5
 Respondent ought to have joined at the new location in line with the

terms of employment and thereafter could have raised his grievances

regarding the said transfer. In view of the aforesaid blatant violation of

the terms of Employment, the Petitioner left with no other choice

issued the termination order/letter dated 12.10.2010 to the

Respondent.

15. I further submit that as per the Termination clause of the

Appointment letter, the Respondent was terminated from services

with immediate effect, by giving a notice pay of 3 (Three) months Basic

salary amounting to Rs. 13719 ( Rupees Thirteen thousand Seven

Hundred and Nineteen Only) vide Cheque bearing No. 465134, dated

12.10.2010 drawn on Axis Bank Ltd, in lieu of notice period, which

was duly encashed by the Respondent.

16. Thereafter Respondent raised an Industrial Dispute bearing No.

7/35/2012 before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, (Central)

Madurai on 14.05.2012. The Conciliation Officer reported the

Conciliation as failure, resulting in referring the dispute in I.D.No.43

of 2014 before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum-

Labour Court, Chennai. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, without considering the stand of the Petitioner on

merits passed an Award dated 05.11.2015 directing the Petitioner to

reinstate the Respondent in service with 50% backwages and other

attendant benefits within a month of the publication of the Award and

interest @7.5% per annum from the date of the award for period of

default in payment. Being aggrieved by the said Award dated

05.11.2015, I am filing the present writ petition to set aside the same

on the following other

6
 GROUNDS

a. The impugned Award dated 05.11.2015 and the consequent directions

are unsustainable in law, equity and a non speaking order.

b. The Award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal –

cum- Labour Court, Chennai is not a speaking order as it ignored the

legal grounds and pleas raised by the Petitioner and the said Order is

liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

c. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum- Labour Court,

Chennai failed to note that the reason for termination has been stated

in the termination order, in Paragraph No.2 of the letter of termination

from service, issued by the Petitioner Company to the Respondent,

that the Respondent showed blatant disregards to the rules and

procedures of the Petitioner Company in violating many clauses

mentioned in the appointment letter.

d. The Respondent failed to see that it is the duty of an employee to

maintain the confidential business Information and trade secrets of

the company which he/she is employed. Unauthorized disclosure of

confidential or classified information constitutes a serious misconduct

on the part of the Respondent against which the Petitioner is entitled

to take disciplinary action including termination of service. While so,

the action been taken against the Respondent’s misconduct is

unerring.

7
e. The Respondent knowing well that he is an employee of a Petitioner

Company and that he is bound by its terms and conditions had

refused to accept the transfer order dated 12.10.2010 without

adducing any valid reason whatsoever and with blatant disregard to

the rules and regulations of the Petitioner Company. The Central

Government Industrial Tribunal – cum- Labour Court, Chennai, failed

to appreciate that this act of the Respondent is a well founded ground

for termination of employment.

f. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum- Labour Court,

Chennai, failed to observe that the Petitioner in line with the terms of

employment terminated the services of the respondent by giving a

notice pay of 3 (Three) months Basic salary amounting to Rs. 13,719/-

( Rupees Thirteen thousand seven hundred and nineteen only) vide

Cheque bearing No. 465134, dated 12.10.2010 drawn on Axis Bank

Ltd, in lieu of notice period. The same was encashed by the

Respondent without raising any issues regarding the same. This fact

was overlooked by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum-

Labour Court, Chennai while passing the Impugned Award.

g. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum- Labour Court,

Chennai failed to consider that the refusal of Respondent to discharge

or perform the duties entrusted to him as an employee of the

Petitioner Company is a valid and legal ground for termination.

In these circumstances the Petitioner has been

constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court seeking relief as prayed

for under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for efficacious

8
 remedy. I state that I have no other alternative remedy and have

exhausted all the alternative remedy available to the Petitioner and I

have not filed any other writ petition seeking for same relief.

I, therefore, humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court may

be pleased to issue a Writ of CERTIORARI or such other Writ or order or

direction in the nature of Writ calling for the Award dated 05.11.2015

passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum- Labour

Court, Chennai, in I.D.No. 43/ 2014 before the Central Government

Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai together with all related

records, quash and set-aside the same and pass such further or other

orders in the interests of justice and circumstances of the case.

Solemnly affirmed at Chennai on

29th day of April 2019 and signed
his name in my presence. BEFORE ME

Advocate, Chennai

9
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.P. No. of 2019

M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance

Co. Ltd.
…Petitioner

Vs

Antony Dhass
... Respondent

AFFIDAVIT OF UMMA SATHISH

KANTH M.

Leela & Co,

G.Balasubramanian
(Ms.1239/1994)
S.Anand (Ms.630/2017)
T.R.S.Mouli Devi (2571/2014)
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER

10
 MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.P. No. of 2018

The Branch Manager,

M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd
No. 85, Sidel Tower, Opp. WCC College, WCC Road,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District-629001
Represented by its authorized signatory,
S.JEYAKUMAR, S/o, Sankarlingam …Petitioner

-Versus-

M.Antony Dhass,
No.12/54, Mary’s Cottage,
Muthuraman Kovil Road, Thickanamcode,
Kanyakumari District – 629 804. …Respondent

WRIT PETITION

The address for the service of the Petitioner is that of his counsel M/s.
Leela & Co., G.Balasubramanian, S. Anand and T.R.S. Mouli Devi,
having office at M/s. Leela & Co., No. 4/8, 4th Floor, Turnbulls road,
Nandhanam, Chennai - 600035

The address for service of the Respondents is the same as stated above.

For the reasons stated in the accompanying Affidavit, it is prayed that

this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of CERTIORARI or
such other Writ or order or direction in the nature of Writ calling for the
Award dated 05.11.2015, in I.D.No. 43/ 2014, issued by Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai together
with all related records, quash the same and pass such further or other
orders in the interests of justice and circumstances of the case.

Dated at Chennai this the 29th day of April 2019

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER

11
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.P. No. of 2019

M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance

Co. Ltd.
…Petitioner

Vs

Antony Dhass
... Respondent

WRIT PETITION

Leela & Co,

G.Balasubramanian
(Ms.1239/1994)
S.Anand (Ms.630/2017)
T.R.S.Mouli Devi (2571/2014)

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER

12