BANGLADESH WATER DEVELOPMENT Vs. CHAIRMAN, LABOUR COURT
SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
Bangladesh Water Development
Chairman, Labour Court
Click here to view full judgement.
MD.ABDUL MATIN, J. -
(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.4.2000 passed in Writ Petition No. 6150 of 1997 by the High Court Division, discharging the Rule and affirming the judgment and order dated 28.04.1997 passed by the Chairman, Divisional Labour Court, Khulna in Complaint Case No.25 of 1995.
(2.) The facts, in short, are that the respondent No. 2 Md. Golam Nabi filed a Complaint Case being No.25 of 1995 in the Divisional Labour Court. Khulna, under section 25(1 )(b) of the Employment of Labour (Standing Orders) Act, 1965 stating, inter alia, that he was appointed on 16.08.1964 as an Work Charge staff, on 18.05.1986 he was made permanent staff and was continuing as such but he was retired from service on and from 04.06.1994 after completing service for 31 years illegally and arbitrarily without giving benefit of pension and gratuity etc. and it is alleged that he had lastly submitted an application to the authority, namely the Chairman of Bangladesh Water Development Board on 17.06.1995 claiming all benefits to which he was entitled as a permanent and regular staff for the entire period he served till the date of his retirement. But the authority namely the Bangladesh Water Development Board did not pass any order upon that application. So the respondent No. 2, after serving a grievance notice demanding justice by registered post, which also the petitioner refused to accept, filed the complaint case.
(3.) The present petitioner Bangladesh water Development Board contested the said case before the labour court by filing a written statement admitting that the respondent No. 2 was appointed in 1964 but stating, inter alia. that he could not be made permanent or regular for want of sanction order for making him permanent staff, from the government, during the period of his service in the Ministry of Irrigation, Flood Control and Water Resource, wherefrom the respondent No. 2 was made to retire from his service, in accordance with law, when he already completed duration of his service and he was paid all the service benefits after legal and proper calculation of the same, for his period of service from the date of his appointment upto the date of his retirement. According to the petitioner the labour court by its judgment and order dated 26.04.1997 illegally allowed the case of the said respondent against the petitioner. The ordering portion of the judgment of the labour court is as follows:-
....[VARNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]....
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.