- (1.) THE petitioner was employed as Salesman with the Pacca Kalan Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd. , Pacca Kalan, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda (the Society, for brevity ). His services were terminated on May 25, 1981. He raised industrial dispute by serving demand notice that his services had been termi nated illegally without issuing any charge-sheet, inquiry or payment of compensation. The appro priate Government made the following refer ence to the Labour Court, Bathinda under Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (for short, the Act) : Whether termination of services of Jagdish Rai workman is justified and in order. If not, to what rel ief/exact amount of compensation is he entitled? The petitioner then filed his statement of claim before the Labour Court. The Management of the Society controverted the plea made in the statement of claim. It also pleaded that the petitioner had gone on illegal strike and as such, the reference was not maintainable as the Society was not an "industry". On the pleadings of the parties, the Labour Court framed the following issues:-1. Whether the order of termination of the workman is justifiable at law and in order? 2. Whether the reference is bad in law as alleged in the preliminary objections of the written statement? 3. Relief.
(2.) UNDER Issue No. 1 the Labour Court held that the termination of services of the petitioner was justified, Issue No. 2 was not pressed and was answered against the management of the society. In view of the finding under issue No. 1 the petitioner was held not entitled to any relief. The reference was answered accordingly.
(3.) THE petitioner challenged the award of the Labour Court dated December 18. 1985 through this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Con-; stitution of India. Our learned brother V. K. Bali. J. found that the services of the petitioner were terminated on the ground that he had resorted to an illegal strike in May, 1981. He further found that if the workmen had resorted to en masse strike, the punishment of removal from service was too harsh and, in his opinion, the workman was entitled to reinstatement in service but without payment of any back wages.;