STATE OF U.P. Vs. LABOUR COURT U.P., DEHARADUN
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF U.P.
Labour Court U.P., Deharadun
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned award dated 24.10.1996 passed by the respondent No. 1 (Annexure-1 to the petition) whereby the learned Labour Court finding that the respondent No. 2- workman had worked 252 days in a calendar year, i.e. more than 240 days, has held that the respondent No. 2 is entitled to the benefit of section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent No. 2 in service. By the impugned award, in lieu of back wages, a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and cost of proceedings, Rs. 500/- were also awarded.
According to the workman-respondent No. 2, his services were terminated without any notice on 4.6.1992. Then, the workman raised an industrial dispute and ultimately, a reference was made under section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication of the following dispute by the Labour Court:--
Whether the termination of services of the workman Sri Ramesh son of Sri Shankar w.e.f. 4.6.1992 is legal and proper? If not, what benefit/relief is the workman entitled to get?
(2.) The case was contested from the side of the employer as well as the workman. Both have filed their written statements.
(3.) Before the Labour Court, the employer along with its written statement also filed the statement of work and the days on which workman had worked. The Labour Court in the impugned award also observed that in compliance of the direction of the Labour Court the employer also filed muster rolls/vouchers duly signed by the Competent Officer of the department.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.