- (1.) The issue for consideration in the writ petition is the effect of termination of service after due notice in the manner required under Section 25-F, even while a petition for adjudication before the Labour Court for an earlier order of termination, was claimed by the workman in violation of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act.
(2.) The petitioner was employed on daily wage basis with Punjab State Electricity Board in June, 1986 and was retrenched from service on 30.04.1987. This retrenchment was a subject of challenge through a reference before the Labour Court. Even when the proceedings were pending, the workman was reemployed on 01.11.1988 and was retrenched again on 25.08.1989 after serving him a notice as required under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. Before the Labour Court, the Punjab State Electricity Board sought to contend that he had been subsequently terminated after due notice. The Tribunal still directed reinstatement finding that it cannot traverse beyond the reference and the reference was related to the validity of the retrenchment order made on 30.04.1987.
(3.) Before this Court, at the time when interim orders were sought, the Division Bench had ensured that the petitioner was paid the wages for the period when the Labour Court had held that the petitioner had suffered an illegal and unlawful retrenchment by the order dated 30.04.1987 till he was properly retrenched on 25.08.1989.;