G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. - (1.) IN the present writ petition challenge is to the order dated 5.4.2002 (Annexure P/11) whereby services of the petitioner were terminated by respondent no.2 and the award dated 11.2.2009 (Annexure P/10) whereby reference has been declined and answered in negative against the workman.
(2.) A perusal of the paper book would go on to show that the workman was appointed on 9.10.2000 (Annexure P/1) as Cook on contract basis from month to month basis by the Indian Red Cross Society, Haryana State Branch, Sector 16, Chandigarh at the rate of Rs. 2408/ - per month. As per Clause 5 of the appointment letter his services were liable to be terminated by 24 hours notice on either side or on payment of 24 hours service charges in lieu thereof without assigning any reason. The petitioner in pursuance of the said employment worked till March, 2002 and allegedly took leave on account of his mother's illness till 4.4.2002. When he came back to join his duties on 30.4.2002, he was not allowed to join duty to which he raised demand on 14.5.2002 (Annexure P/3). In reply the defence taken was that the workman was appointed on contractual basis from month to month basis at a fixed salary. He was absent from duty without any information and he abandoned the job himself on 1.4.2002 and never came to the office. The demand notice was received on 17.5.2002 for the first time and therefore, he had abandoned his job without any information. It was pleaded that it was a temporary appointment and there was immediate need of Cook and as such a temporary appointment of another person was made as there exists no post of Cook with the society.
(3.) THE matter on 8.12.2003 was referred to the Labour Court by the State Government as to whether services were terminated illegally and as to what effect and what relief he was entitled to. The demand notice was ordered to be treated as statement of claim. The respondent society contested the same on the same grounds as noticed above. The workman stepped into the witness box as AW1 and closed his evidence whereas the Management examined R.C.Sharma, Accounts Officer as MW -1. The Labour Court noticed that there was no complaint against the workman regarding the work and conduct for the period he worked with the respondent -society and he had worked for 541 days continuously on contract basis. On 29.3.2002 he had received a telephonic message from his native place Nepal and due to emergency he applied leave for 25 days and he was allowed to go and when he came back he was not allowed to join duty. It was also noticed that the workman asked the respondent -management to produce its entire record but the management failed to produce the record, so an adverse inference was required to be drawn against the management. The management witness also admitted that neither any show cause notice was issued to the workman nor any charge sheet was issued nor any enquiry was conducted against the workman before terminating his services. He also admitted that after termination of the workman another Cook was appointed on contract basis and same post was regularised by the management. It was noticed that no notice was given to the workman calling him to resume the duties. However, the relief was denied on the ground that workman himself had admitted that the said leave application of the workman was not received in the office and the original application was neither sent by post nor original application was proved in Court. It was only a copy which was exhibited as EX. W1 and there was no post of Cook and therefore, he was not entitled for reinstatement. It was held that Indian Red Cross Society was engaged in various types of business and is proved to be an industry. Accordingly, it was held that the workman had joined on contract basis and he left his job without information and the contract had rightly been terminated. The reference was declined in such circumstances.;