Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Santosh Kumar Srivastava brief holder of Sri V. K. Goel.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Clerk-Cum-Typist in U. P. Industrial Consultants Limited on 11.3.1996 and worked continuously till 16th August, 1987. It is alleged by the petitioner that his services were terminated on 17.8.1987 without any reason in an illegal manner without complying the provisions of Section 6N of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The contention of the employer-respondent is that the petitioner was appointed in March, 1986 as English Typist on temporary basis and continued till 17.8.1987. He was seeking for better job else-where. In the written statement before the labour court, it has been mentioned that the petitioner actually got a better job and did not come to work after 17.8.1987. The employer made offer that they are willing to take him back in service, but the petitioner himself stopped doing the duties. An offer was again made before the labour court that the employers are willing to take him back in service when the conciliation proceedings were going on, but the petitioner has not joined his duty. The labour court after appreciation of evidence and the documents on record of this case, has held that considering all the aspects of the matter and the entire evidence on record, I feel that the whole case taken up for and on behalf of the petitioner is baseless. It appears that his services were never terminated by the employers and he himself stopped going to duty with effect from 18.8.1987 and thereafter did not avail of the offer to rejoin his duty. He is, therefore, not entitled to any relief.
(3.) FOR the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.;