- (1.) The Petitioner is a Corporation constituted under the State Road Transport Corporation Act. Prior to its constitution the U.P. Govt. was running part of the transport industry in the State directly through the U.P. Govt. Roadways, but after the corporation was set up the work of the Roadways was taken over by the Corporation.
(2.) Respondent No. 1 was appointed in the service of the U.P. Govt. Roadways in 1962, and since then he continued in service as a government servant. It is alleged in para 1 of the writ petition that Respondent No. 1 was involved in illegally removing some property of the Corporation, and when this was detected he submitted his resignation on 2-5-77 which was accepted the same day. The Respondent No. 1 raised a dispute which was referred to the labour court which held by its award dated 30-8-80 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) that the resignation of Respondent No. 1 was obtained by coercion.
(3.) The Petitioner challenged this award dated 30-8-80 by writ petition No. 347/81 which was allowed on 29-11-89 by the judgment whose copy is Annexure 2. A perusal of this judgment shows that the only point on which the matter was remanded to the labour court was whether there was an employer-employee relationship between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1. The High Court specifically held that the point regarding acceptance of resignation of Respondent No. 1 had no merit and was consequently rejected.;