BASU DEV BHATT Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
LAWS(UTN)-2013-7-192
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 24,2013

Basu Dev Bhatt Appellant
VERSUS
PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) By means of this petition the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 27-10-2004, passed by Industrial Tribunal Uttaranchal Haldwani Nainital, to the extent it held the petitioner not entitled for reinstatement. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner ins service on original post with continuity of service and arrears of salary as admissible in law.
(2.) Brief facts of the case giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as part time tube-well driver/operator by the order of Executive Engineer, Tube-well Construction Division, Irrigation Department Haldwani, Nainital respondent No.3 vide letter dated 16-9-1983. According to the petitioner he was being paid a consolidated salary of Rs. 299/- per month after performing exactly the same duties as performed by a regular Tube-well Operator. He worked as such till 2-12-1990 and on 2-12-1990 the services of petitioners were terminated orally. After termination of services, the petitioner raised industrial dispute and approached the Conciliation Officer for redressal of his grievances. The conciliation proceedings failed and the dispute was referred to Industrial Tribunal vide order dated 6-10-1999, which was numbered as industrial dispute No. 57/1999 before the Industrial Tribunal. Parties filed written statement before the tribunal and also adduced evidence.
(3.) The learned tribunal after considering the evidence on record and hearing the counsel for the parties came to the conclusion that the petitioner was a part time workman and was not a regular or daily wager workman. The employer has not terminated his services in accordance with law and committed irregularity. It was also held that the service cadre of the workman has ceased therefore he is not entitled for reinstatement. However he was awarded Rs. 2500/- as damages. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned award the workmanpetitioner has preferred this writ petition.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.