- (1.) This judgment shall dispose of CWP Nos.27720 of 2013 and 4132 of 2014, involving common questions of facts and law. However, to dictate order, facts have been taken from CWP No.27720 of 2013 titled Jitender Kumar Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-I, Gurgaon & another.
(2.) The petitioner-workman is aggrieved against the award dated 07.06.2013 (Annexure P13) whereby the Labour Court, Gurgaon has decided the reference against the workman and in favour of the Management, by holding that he was a probationer and was discharged from service during the period of probation and therefore, the said order could not be held to be stigmatic.
(3.) A perusal of the paperbook would go on to show that the petitioner was appointed initially on 12.01.2001, after 2 years of training. As per the letter of appointment (Annexure P1), he was to be on probation for a period of 6 months which was liable to be extended at the sole discretion of the Management and he was deemed to be on probation unless confirmed in writing. The period of probation was, thereafter, extended for 3 months on 12.07.2001 till 11.10.2001 (Annexure R6), after advising him to be more careful in future by considering his appraisal report and asked him to improve his work and conduct. Thereafter, on 09.10.2001 (Annexure P5), the respondent-Management discharged him by holding that his work and conduct was not found upto the expectation of the Management. Compensation and notice of pay, along with the letter of termination of service was also sent to him and the discharge was after the Management had reviewed the working of the probationers on 08.10.2001 (Annexure P8) wherein it was noticed that the said probationers were remaining absent and were adversely affecting the working of the Company and were doing illegal activities at the gate of the Company and were affecting the industrial peace of the Company. The matter was, thereafter, referred to the Labour Court on account of the demand notice dated 21.01.2002 (Annexure P10), issued by the petitioner-workman under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the 'Act').;