B.L. Yadav, J. - (1.) The employer, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.of India, seeking a relief for a writ of certiorari quashing the award dated 1-8-1991 (Annexure-3) to the petition), published on 21-1-1992, sent by the Labour Court to the petitioner on 21-1-1992 and received by the petitioner on 6-2-1992 (Annexure-3), on a reference bung made under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act). The reference under the Act was whether after the death of Murari Lal, the workman (Ticket No. 301, Turner) his widow Smt Shanti Devi, respondent No. 1 was entitled to get employment in pursuance of the letter and spirit of the provisions of U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants (Dying in Harness) Rules, 1974, (for short the Rules), applicable to the establishment of the petitioner employer, Under the award it has been held that Smt. Shanti Devi, aged about 27 years, being widow of the workman Murari Lal, was entitled to be provided with an employment commensurate with her qualification, at least to the post of peon, in place of her deceased husband since 1985.
(2.) Factual matrix of the case is that one Murari Lal was the workman, who was retrenched from service by order dated 29-10-1976 and a reference was made under Section 4-K of the Act about the legality and justification of that order of retrenchment, and the relief and compensation to be provided in case the order of retrenchment was illegal. It was held in the award dated 26-3-1990 (Annexure-1) by the Labour Court that illegality the workman was removed from his employment and his name was struck off and kept in the register of substitute workmen, nevertheless he was not given any employment, and the Labour Court held that the employer was expected to provide employment to the substitute workman. The second award dated 29-5-1985 (Annexure-2), was against the order of retrenchment, where the retrenchment was held to be illegal and the workman was directed to be paid a sum of Rs. 4,400/- as compensation. It is the third awn d dated 1-8-1991 (Annexure-3) holding that the widow of the workman was entitled to be provided with an employment commensurate with her educational qualification, as peon etc. There is no dispute that the husband of Smt. Shanti Devi, respondent No. 1, was in employment of the petitioner and her husband died in harness.
(3.) Sri V.M. Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that as by earlier two awards, Murari Lal, the workman, the husband of respondent No.1, was held to be a substitute workman, and retrenchment of the workman was held to be illegal, and he was provided compensation, consequently the rights of the deceased workman or his widow came to an end and the same could not be extended to the extent of providing employment to the heir of the deceased.;