069-NLR-NLR-V-74-R.-G.-SILVA-Appellant-and-SOUTHERN-FREIGHTERS-LTD.-AMBALANGODA-Respondent.pdf
SAME HA WICK R A ME, J.—Silva v. Southern Freighters Ltd.
23 9
1971Present: Samerawickrame, J.
R. G. SILVA, Appellant, and SOUTHERN FREIGHTERS LTD.,AMBALANGODA, Respondent
S. C. 117/68— L. T. Galle No. G. 3524
Industrial Disputes Act—Section 31 B (I) (6)—Workman who has hdmselj terminatedhis employment—Whether he can claim gratuity.
A workman, when ho ivaa asked by his einployor to wait for some time,lost liis temper and vacated his post. Ho did not report for work thereafter.His period of service could not bo regarded as long. ,
Held, that tho workman was nob entitled to tho payment of a gratuity.
Appeal from an order of a Labour Tribunal.
.-{. de %. Gunawardenct. with Bivial Rajapakse, for the employee -appellant.
R. L. Juyasuriya. for the employer-respondent.
Cur. adv. vult.
May 5, 1971. Samerawickrame, J.—
This is an appeal against the dismissal of an application made on behalfof a workman. The President of tho Labour Tribunal found that theworkman had vacated his post. He stated, " Then, when ho was askedby the establishment tp wait for some time he had lost his temper and
2-fO
SAAIERAIVICKRAME, J.—Silra v. Southern Freighters Ltd.
vacated his post. He had not reported for -work thereafter. Thereis no reason to disbelieve tlie Respondent’s evidcnco. As Geeris Silvalias vacated his post lie cannot bo granted any relief under the IndustrialDisputes Act ”. I see no raison to interfere with the finding of factarrived at by the President of the Labour Tribunal that the workmanbad vacated his post.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Presidenthad misdirected himself when ho stated that as tho workman had vacatedhis post ho cannot bo granted any relief under tho Industrial DisputesAct and submitted that a gratuity might bo granted even to a workmanwho has himself terminated employment. As a matter of law it maybe correct that under Section 31B (1) (b) of the Act- relief or redress maybe available in respect of gratuity or other benefits oven where theworkman himself terminates his employment. In this case however, itcannot bo said that tho period of employment was long. A workmanwho terminates his employment in the manner set out in tho order ofthe President after a period of servico which cannot be regarded as long,does not uppoar to bo entitled to the payment of a gratuity. Tho appealis accordingly dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.