- (1.) THE facts leading to the filing of the present Letters Patent Appeal filed at the instance of the workman-appellant Ranjit Singh are as under:- The appellant was appointed as a driver with the respondent Gidderbaha Co-operative Marketing-cum-Processing Society Ltd. , Gidderbaha in the year 1971. His services were terminated on 25. 10. 1990 on the plea that the truck which he was driving had been sold and that his services had become redundant. He claimed a reference to the Labour Court and the Labour Court in its award dated 12. 1. 1994 held that his retrenchment from service was void abinitio being violative of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but as the truck in question had been sold, the Labour Court directed that a lump sum compensation for Rs. 50,000/- be paid to him. Two writ petitions were thereafter filed in this Court; one by the workman and the other by the employer. Both the writ petitions were dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 6. 2. 1995. The aforesaid judgment has been impugned in the present Letters Patent Appeal only by the workman.
(2.) WE have heard learned Counsel for the appellant and gone through the record.
(3.) CONCEDEDLY the truck in question had been sold and no new truck had been purchased. It has, however, been argued by Mr. Sharma, the learned Counsel for the appellant that the appropriate procedure for the respondent society was to have offered an alternative employment to the appellant as such work was available in the other branches of the co-operaive society. He has also argued that in any case the lump sum compensation awarded to the appellant was wholly inadequate and did not represent even a fair living figure and has urged that this should be enhanced. In support of this argument, reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in O. P. Bhandari v. Indian Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. and Ors. A. I. R. 1987 S. C. 111.;