Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) -
(2.) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record. This writ petition is directed against the award dated 4.4.1984 passed by respondent No. 1. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 2 made a complaint to the Regional Conciliation Officer, Agra stating that he has been illegally removed from service. On his complaint a notice was issued to the petitioner by the Labour Inspector directing the petitioner as well as respondent No. 2 to appear in his office on 17.3.1981 for the purposes of making enquiry. The Enquiry could not be made by the Labour Inspector on 17th March, 1981 and the case was fixed on 30th March, 1981. On the said date, the workman appeared and he made his statement and stated that he was in service of the petitioner since 5.10.1980 and worked till 8.1.1981. He was paid salary on 8.1.1981. The Labour Inspector recorded his statement and Netra Pal. The respondent put his signature on the statement as well as on the report which was submitted by the Labour Inspector to the Conciliation Officer. Harish Chandra Verma appeared on behalf of the petitioner and he made statement before the Labour Inspector on 7.4.1981 and Sri Netra Pal was not in the employment of M/s. Verma Service Station. The State Government made a reference to the Labour Court, Agra where it was registered as Adjudication Case No. 218 of 1982. The petitioner submitted his objection. In para 5A of the objection, the petitioner quoted the statement which respondent No. 2 has made before the Labour Inspector. The respondent No. 2 filed replication to the objection filed by the petitioner. He did not deny that he did not make any statement and he denied the averments made in para 5A of the objection. The petitioner moved an application before the Labour Court to summon the record of the Conciliation proceedings, but the application was returned with the observation that respondent No. 2 had not denied the statement which he had made before the Labour Inspector and in these circumstances it was observed that summoning of the Labour Inspector was of no consequence. The petitioner filed the following documents before the Labour Court : (i) Attendance Register-1.4.1980 to 31.3.1981 (ii) Inspection report-No. 209945, dated 20.8.1980 (iii) Inspection report-No. 214835, dated 9.12.1980 (iv) Inspection report-No. 260665, dated 28.3.1981
(3.) THE attendance register was duly verified by the Labour Inspector. THE attendance register also contains his signature. It is alleged that the Court did not look into the signatures of the Labour Inspector on the register. There was no dispute that the attendance register did not contain the signatures of the Labour Inspector. It is also not in dispute that at the time of inspection the names of the employees were given and their names were verified by the Labour Inspector after checking the attendance register and other documents.;