- (1.) State of Uttar Pradesh through District Sports Officer has filed the present writ petition, challenging an award passed by Labour Court, U.P. at Bareilly, in Adjudication Case No.148 of 2002, dated 18.5.2015, whereby reference on the question as to whether termination of services of respondent workman w.e.f. 1.8.2000 is valid or not has been answered in favour of respondent workman. It is held that petitioner employer has terminated the services of respondent workman without complying with the provisions of section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), and therefore, he is entitled to reinstatement alongwith continuity of service with 75% back wages.
(2.) It transpires that dispute was referred by Additional Commissioner, exercising his jurisdiction under section 4-K of the Act on 29.6.2002, which got registered as Adjudication Case No.148 of 2002. The respondent workman filed his written statement claiming that he was engaged in February, 1994 as Peon by the petitioner employer and he continuously worked till 1.8.2000, and had drawn last wages at the rate of Rs.1,105/- per month. Grievance raised before the labour court was that without complying with the requirement of provisions of section 6-N and in teeth of section 6-Q of the Act, respondent workman has been retrenched and accordingly prayer was made for reinstatement alongwith back wages.
(3.) Petitioner-Employer contested the claim stating that employer is not an industry and that any claim at the instance of respondent-workman could be raised only before the Public Services Tribunal, which has already been rejected on 17.8.2000.;