- (1.) YATINDRA Singh, J. Sri Ved Prakash Agrawal (Sri Agrawal) Joined U. P. State Sugar Corporation Limited, Lucknow (the Corporation) sometime, in the year, 1973. His services were terminated on 24-8-1976, w. e. f. 25-3-1976; he raised a labour dispute. In conciliation proceedings, the parties came to the terms and the order terminating his services was cancelled on 17-11-1976. According to Sri Agrawal he went back to the Corporation on 24-11-1976, but was not taken back and he raised a labour dispute again. This dispute was referred to Labour Court. The Labour Court by its award dated 14-5-1980 accepted the contention of the Corporation that Sri Agrawal himself did not join his duties on his own accord. In view of this finding no relief was granted to him. It appears that subsequently Sri Agrawal did join duties sometimes in 1978 and the Corporation permitted him to work.
(2.) SRI Agrawal continued in service of the Corporation and was charge sheeted on 9-2-1987, for misconduct (disobedience, insubordination, indiscipline, creating nuisance and disturbing the workers while on duty ). An injury officer was appointed and he submitted his report on 2-3-1987. Service of SRI Agrawal were terminated on 3-3-1987 on the basis of inquiry report. He again raised a Labour dispute and this was referred to the Labour Court by the order dated 22-2-1988. The case was initially sent to Labour Court, Meerut for adjudication, thereafter it was transferred to some other Labour Courts and ultimately to the Industrial Tribunal-1, Allahabad (the Tribunal ). This reference was allowed in favour of SRI Agrawal on 2-5-1999, and termination order was set aside on the finding that no retrenchment compensation was given to SRI Agrawal before terminating his services. He was ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service with full back wages and other benefits. Sri Agrawal filed a Writ Petition No. 2667 of 2000 (the first writ petition)Following are the refers claimed in this writ petition.- (a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records of Adj. Case No. 70 of 1979 from Labour Court, Lucknow (respondent No. 2) and quash award dated 14-5-1980 passed by Presiding Officer of said Labour Court, most illegally, dishonestly and unfairly detailed above in this writ petition, once again. (b) Issue a writ of mandamus to quash all the illegal orders annexed as Annexure-C,defg, as detailed above issued by employers, using serious unfair labour practices to victimise and harass the petitioner, terminating his services from 25-3-1976, most abruptly and illegally. (c) Issue a writ, order or direction reinstating the petitioner from 25-3-1978, with continuity his services and with full back wages etc. , and other benefits, which the petitioner would have got, had his services not been terminated illegally and abruptly by employers. (d) Issue a writ order or direction for payment of interest @ 18% p. a. on payment of full back wages etc. , cost to the tune of Rs. 4. 00 lacks (four lacs) incurred by the petitioner towards his travelling expenses and heavy legal expenses for contesting the proceeding so long since 1978, inasmuch as to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 5. 00 (Five) Lacs towards house rent and medical expenses paid and incurred by petitioner since 1976, and also direct the employers to settle and pay the petitioner his other claims and dues pending with the employers since 1978 inasmuch the employers must maintain seniority of petitioner in the matter of promotions given to junior employers since 25-3-1978. (e) Issue a writ order or direction for prosecution of employers and advocates Shri K. D. Srivastava, Sri S. D. Kaushik and Sri Narendra Singh under provisions of law of Prevention of Corruption Act, Indian Penal Code and Law of Goondas Act, by appreciating the facts and circumstances detailed by the petitioner at various times, stated above. (f) Issue any such other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (g) To award the costs of the writ petition to the petitioner. for * Quashing of the award dated 14-5-1980; * Directing for his reinstatement from 25-3-1980; * Payment of interest on full back wages; and * Prosecution of employers and their Advocate under different Acts. The first writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 19-1-2000 on the ground of latches and Sri Agrawal filed an appeal before the Apex Court. During pendency of this appeal, the Corporation also filed WP No. 9202 of 2000 (the second writ petition) challenging the award of the Tribunal dated 2-5- 1999. The Corporation did not reinstate Sri Agrawal in pursuance of the award on the ground that he superannuated on 6-1-1996 during pendency of labour dispute, and thereafter interim orders were obtained from this Court in the second writ petition.
(3.) THE Apex Court allowed the appeal of Sri Agrawal on 16-8-2000 dismissing the first writ petition and remanded to send the matter for re-decision on one question to consider whether Sri Agrawal could be retired on 6-1-1996 or was he to be retired on any other date. This point was to be decided after affording opportunity to the parties concerned. THE relevant part of the Apex Court order is as follows : Writ petition No. 2667 of 2000 is restored to the file of the High Court with a request to consider the only question as to whether the appellant can be said to have validity retired on 6th January, 1996 or whether in the light of any other birth date he is entitled to be retired on any later date. All these questions will have to be examined on their own merits in the remanded proceedings after hearing the parties and after giving them opportunity to lead whatever documentary evidence they went to lead. THE Apex Court while remanding the case also expressed at desire that the writ petition filed by Sri Agrawal alongwith the writ petition filed by the corporation may be decided, if possible, within six month. THE are being decided today. THEse cases were against to same Single Judge void had earlier decided the case but were released by him and were later assigned to me by the Chief Justice i. e. how I am deciding these cases. POINTS FOR DETERMINATION: Have heard Sri Agrawal, in person and Sri S. S. Nigam, Counsel for the corporation. Following points arises for determination in this case: (i) The age of superannuation in the Corporation is 60 years. According to the Corporation the date of birth of Sri Agrawal is 6-1-1938, whereas according to Sri Agrawal his date of birth is 16-1-1943. What is the correct date of birth of Sri Agrawal? (ii) The Industrial Tribunal has set aside the order of termination on the ground that no retrenchment compensation was given. The services of Sri Agrawal were terminated after disciplinary inquiry. Was he entitled to any retrenchment compensation? Was it a case of retrenchment ? Could the award be set aside on the ground that no retrenchment was given? 1st POINT: SRI AGRAWAL's DATE OF BIRTH 6-1-1936 :;