- (1.) D. S. Sinha, J. Heard Shri K. P. Agar wal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Shri Rakesh Tewari, learned Counsel representing the respon dent No. 3.
(2.) BY an order dated 26th June, 1974 the services of the petitioner-workman were dispensed with by the employer-respondent No. 3. This led to an industrial dispute which was adjudicated upon by the Labour Court IV at Kanpur, respondent No. 2, in adjudication case No. 74 of 1979. The adjudication culminated into the award dated 22nd December, 1979, a copy whereof is Annexure-8 to the petition. The respondent No. 2 has found it as a matter of fact that the termination of the workman by the employer amounted to retrenchment as contemplated in Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called the Act. It has also been found that neither one month's notice in writing indicating reasons for retrenchment nor wages in lieu of notice was given to the workman. Further finding of the Labour Court is that no retrenchment compensa tion was given to the workman. Not withstanding with these findings, respon dent No. 2 has declared that the termina tion of the services of the petitioner-workman was justified and legal. Shri Agarwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, contends and rightly so, that once it is found that the termination amounted to retrenchment and that re quirement of giving notice or wages in lieu thereof and of giving retrenchment com pensation has not been complied with, the termination of the petitioner could not be declared to be justified and legal.
(3.) ON other hand Shri Tewari, learned Counsel representing the employer-respon dent, contends that the findings of the Labour Court that no notice was given; that no wages in lieu of notice was given; and that no retrenchment compensation was given to the workman are perverse. Suffice it to say that except during the course of arguments the employer-respondent never challenged the award in any manner. Indeed, the respondent-employer having not challenged the im pugned award will be deemed to have ac quiesced to it, including the findings recorded therein. Thus, impugned award has become final qua employer-respondent No. 3.;