S.R.Singh, J. - (1.) The writ petition is directed against the award dated 27.5.89 passed by the Labour Court, Gorakhpur in adjudication case no. 285 of 1985. The dispute referred to the Labour Court for adjudication was as to whether the employer was justified in not taking work from the respondent workman Prem Chand with effect from the date of commencement of the crushing season 1983-84 and if not to what relief was the workman entitled?
(2.) The case of the respondent workman was that he was appointed as seasonal clerk in the crushing season 1977-78 against a vacant post of seasonal clerk and worked during four crushing seasons from 1977-78 to 1982-83. It was his case that although he was described as Lipik but in the mill premises he had been doing different duties including duties of cane carrier and/or loading and unloading of sugar etc. He claims to have been paid bonus for crushing seasons he had worked in. The reference was contested by the employer inter-alia on the grounds that the workman was not at all employed in the factory in the crushing season 1977-78, as alleged by him and instead he worked for short durations during the crushing seasons 1979-80 and 1980-81 as a Clerk in temporary capacity; in 1981-82 he was engaged as unskilled workman for performing certain duties, of temporary nature; and he was not engaged in the crushing season 1982-83 and was, therefore, not entitled to any relief. The Labour Court on consideration of the material brought on record held that the respondent workman worked as a Clerk for whole of the crushing season 1982-83 and, therefore, the employer was under an obligation to employ him in the next season in terms of Clause A (1) of the Standing Order governing the conditions of employment in vacuum pan sugar factories in U.P.
(3.) I have heard Ms. Bharti Sapru, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Shyam Narain, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.;