’Posted on : 2012-09-12
An Indian Engineer, who was slapped with an ‘illegal status’ and ban on mobility by his sponsor, said that he received a favourable verdict from Labour Market Regulatory Authority (LMRA).
According to V N Rengarajan, his written appeal to the LMRA CEO Ausamah Al Absi dated June 26 was ‘impartially scrutinised’ according to the rules. The verdict dated July 18 stated that the offence slapped on him was removed.
DT had reported in the month of June that Rengarajan accused his sponsor of plotting against him and urged officials to remove his illegal status and clear the mobility ban he received. He alleged that his sponsor has not paid him salary for a month, harassed and tortured his family. He said he was criminally misrepresented, threatened and finally framed ‘illegal’ through a forged complaint.
The employer - the owner of an electrical equipment company in Bahrain where Mr Rengarajan worked - had then told DT that he intended to file a defamation suit. He had said that he had valid documents as evidence which the employee had used against him and his company.
“I was forced to leave the country due to further harassment of the sponsor while the case was at LMRA, but I am happy my wait was worth,” Mr Rengarajan told DT from India
“I am extremely grateful to Mr. Al Absi for his serious, kind and impartial scrutiny and giving a verdict favouring justice. The case is in labour court for compensation and proceedings are going on. I understand that LMRA is yet to take action as per their procedure to sue the employer in court for having made false claims and thereby leading to even suspension of business, according to the verdict,” he said.
“I was intimidated by strangers allegedly sent by the sponsor. In view of safety to my life and family, I had to go to India at one point of time. The sponsor even threatened me in India, for which I am lodging a complaint appropriately,” he added.
At present, Mr Rengarajan is eligible to come back to Bahrain with new work permit immediately and said that he hoped justice would prevail in labour court as well.
The company owner could not be contacted for comments.