- (1.) Petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing award dated 29.8.2005, Annexure P-1, allowing the claim statement of respondent No. 1-workman. Respondent No. 1-workman was appointed as daily paid Mason in January, 1995 and worked as such till 3.3.1997 when his services were terminated by the petitioner-department. Respondent No. 1-workman served demand notice upon the department whereafter reference was made to the Labour Court for adjudication. Respondent-workman filed his claim statement averring therein that he had put in more than 240 days of service in each calendar year and that the department illegally terminated his services in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short, the Act). He further averred that neither he was given one month's notice nor paid the retrenchment compensation. Upon notice of the claim statement, the department filed its reply thereby denying the averments made in the claim statement. It was stated that the termination of the workman was in accordance with the statutory provisions. It was further alleged that the workman was offered retrenchment compensation of Rs. 4576/- including wages payable in February 1997 but the workman refused to accept it and that thereafter the same was sent to him vide bank draft through registered post which too was refused by him. Replication was then filed by the workman controverting the submissions made in the written statement and reiterating the one in the claim statement.
(2.) The learned Labour Court on appreciation of evidence adduced on record by the parties, observed that even the retrenchment compensation, as allegedly offered by the department, is short by Rs. 352/- as the amount required to be paid was Rs. 2640/- and not Rs. 2288/-. Bank draft dated 26.3.1997 was subsequent to the date of termination. Accordingly, the learned Labour Court decided the reference in favour of respondent-workman and against the petitioner-department. Hence, the present writ petition by the management.
(3.) Upon notice of the writ petition, written statement has been filed by respondent No. 1 resisting the pleas raised in the writ petition. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book.;