STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. ARUN KUMAR SINGH ALIAS ARUN PRATAP SINGH
LAWS(ALL)-1998-2-74
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (AT: LUCKNOW)
Decided on February 02,1998

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Appellant
VERSUS
ARUN KUMAR SINGH ALIAS ARUN PRATAP SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.C. Verma, J. - (1.) The respondent Arun Kumar Singh alias Arun Pratap Singh. had approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in Writ Petition No. 7810 of 1990 with the prayer to quash the order of termination dated 23.7.90 and for direction to the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisatlon. The respondent was a Diploma Holder in Civil Engineering and was given appointment on dally wages with the establishment of District Rural Development Agency. The District Magistrate, being the Ex-Official Chairman of the District Rural Development Agency and Additional District Magistrate, Project being the Secretary intimated by the impugned order dated 23.7.90 that the services of the petitioner were not required as regular incumbents have been appointed. The writ petition was allowed and it was held that the establishment of District Rural Development Agency. Sultanpur is an industry within the definition of Industry as defined under the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act and the respondent was a workman as defined under the said Act. It was further held that as the respondent had worked for more than 240 days in a year preceding to the order of termination, the services cannot be dispensed with without compliance of the provisions of Section 6N of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. As there was no compliance of the provisions of Section 6N of the Act in terminating the services of respondent, the Writ Petition was allowed and the order of termination dated 23.7.1990 was quashed.
(2.) The Special Appeal No. 81 (S/B) of 1993 filed by the State of U. P. was also dismissed by the judgment and order dated 20.4.1994 holding that the respondent was a workman and had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding 12 calendar months and was clearly entitled to retrenchment benefits in terms of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The judgment of the learned single Judge, was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.
(3.) The State of U. P. then preferred the appeal to the Hon'ble Supreme Court being State of U. P. and others v. Arun Kumar Singh. Civil Appeal No. 3398 of 1995. Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the appeal by order dated 6.3.1995. Hon'ble the Supreme Court held that the District Development Rural Agency is not an industry within the meaning of Industry as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act and there was no requirement of compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act for termination of the services of the respondent-employee. It was further held that the High Court has also erred in directing regularisation of the employee in the service. Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the District Rural Development Agency is only entrusted with the work of carrying on different schemes entrusted to it including the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana and as such it is not an industry and the provisions of industrial Disputes Act would not apply to the present case. The impugned order of the Division Bench and of the learned single Judge was set aside and the matter was remitted to the High Court for decision in accordance with law and in the light of observations made in the order. The present Special Appeal has come up for hearing before us in the above circumstances.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.