S.S. Nijjar, J. - (1.) THE State of Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the Management) has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the award made by the Labour Court, Gurdaspur in reference No. 113 of 1989 which has been answered in favour of the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the workman) on 7.10.1998. The workman was appointed as driver on 15.4.1982 as work charge as R.S.D. project. He was retrenched on 12.8.1983 due to paucity of funds. It is further stated in the petition that during the year 1983 -84, 1400 other workman had also been, retrenched alongwith the workman. After termination, the workman raised a demand notice. The appropriate Government made a reference to the Labour Court under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to the following effect : - "Whether termination of services of Shri Jit Singh workmen is justified and in order ? If not, to what relief/exact amount of compensation is he entitled -
(2.) BEFORE the Labour Court, the workmen claimed infringement of Sections 25 -G and 25 -H of the Act. The Management reiterated that the workman had been retrenched due to paucity of time. It was also stated that Section 25 -11 of the Act had been complied with. The Labour Court framed the following issues : - 1. Whether the workman is the employee of the respondent ? 2. Whether termination of services of the workman is justified and in order ? Relief. 3. Issue No. 1 has been decided in favour of the workman. After examining the facts, the Labour Court came to the conclusion that admittedly no retrenchment compensation or wages from 1.8.1983 to 17.8.1983 were paid to the workman at the time of retrenchment. The Labour Court also noticed the evidence of the workman to the effect that some persons junior to him namely Ruldu Ram, Sham Singh and Sohan Singh etc, were taken into service after termination of the services of the workman. He had also categorically stated that he was not re - employed on account of ill -will and hostility of Shri A.S. Bajwa, the then Executive Engineer, as he was active member of the union. This evidence has not been rebutted by the Management. The Labour Court relied on a judgment in case Purna Theatre v. State of West Bengal and others, 1997(4) SCT 147 (Calcutta):, 1997 L.I.C. 997, and held that if the amount offered towards retrenchment compensation fell short of the amount that required to be paid, the retrenchment is void ab initio. I have heard the submission made by the learned counsel for the State of Punjab. I find no infirmity in the finding recorded by the Labour Court. The writ petition is without any merit. Dismissed. No costs.
(3.) PETITION dismissed.;