Siddhartha Varma - (1.) Upon an industrial dispute being raised by the respondent no.3-Pramod Kumar Mishra, a Reference was made by the State Government to the respondent no-2 on 11.6.2007. The Reference reads as under :- ... VARNACULAR TEXT OMITTED...
(2.) However, when the respondent no.2 i.e. the Industrial Tribunal (3), Uttar Pradesh, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur answered the Reference in favour of the respondent no.3, the instant writ petition was filed.
(3.) The case of the respondent no.3 had been that he was posted as a Security Guard with the petitioner on 19.6.2003 through the respondent no.4-U.P. Poorva Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited. However, when on 5.2.2007, the respondent no.3 was, without any reason, removed from service and that too orally without any notice etc. as was contemplated under section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the cause of action arose. The further case of the respondent no.3 was that upon his removal another Guard namely Baij Nath was engaged in his place. The case was contested by the petitioner and it had taken a stand that the respondent no.3 was in fact an employee of respondent no.4 and was only sent to the petitioner for performing certain functions; there was no relationship of employer and employee between the petitioner and respondent no.3 and in fact the respondent no.4 was the employer of the respondent no.3. In fact it was pleaded and argued by the petitioner before the Labour Court that the petitioner never made any payment to the respondent no.3. It was also stated before the Labour Court that the petitioner never terminated the services of respondent no.3.;