Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. A priest in a family temple has come to court. Purely materialistic is his demand; demand for money - arrears of salary, as he puts it-from the Sree Ram Temple Trust, Alleppey. He fought for it before the Labour Court. He has not got it. An adverse order passed by the Labour Court is now attacked by him.

2. The jurisdiction of the Labour Court under Section 33-C(2) of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was invoked by the petitioner by exhibit P-3 petition dated 31st January, 1986. He averred that he was entitled to unpaid salary for the preceding eight years at a monthly rate of Rs. 553; and for 12 years prior to that at the monthly rate of Rs. 200. The claims for the two periods aggregate to Rs. 1,01,088.

3. A fundamental objection was taken by the opposite party. It contended that the petitioner was not a "workman" and that the opposite party was not an employer; it claimed to be a "religious and charitable trust which manages the affairs of a family temple", and that the petitioner was only a "poojari...performing the poojas in the temple". According to the opposite party, when the petitioner crossed the age of 70, he was not in a position to render effectively his duties as a priest. That prompted the trust to terminate his services. By exhibit P-l communication dated 31st March, 1985, the trust terminated his services and intimated the petitioner its preparedness to pay him; in recognition of his past services, a sum of Rs. 2,500 and requested him to receive that amount from its office.

The second period begins with the advent of Sankara. He found that the ancient worship of the elements was losing hold on the popular mind, and that the people were being led by the precepts of Buddhism into the track of atheism. He had to fight blind orthodoxy behind him and materialism ahead of him. He adopted a compromise."

13. The decision recounted how rich endowments were made for the unkeep of temples. Trusted service had however, to be found. It had always been the belief in India that "the nearer a man is to God, the farther is he from Him." It is unnecessary for the purpose of this case to delve deep into, or deal at length with, the history of the temples, yet, a reference to a decline in the priestcraft as made therein, may furnish a background to the present sight and fight in the case, when a priest had taken the road to the Labour Court. The slokas of Vaidyanatha Dikshitar (together with their translations by Manghat Krishna Menon) were given in that decision. One sloka is particularly striking. It reads: