- (1.) The petitioner is aggrieved with the award dated 12.8.2004, copy Annexure P. 1 whereby the claim of the petitioner has been dismissed.
(2.) It emerges from record that on account of remaining absent from 1.4.1990 onwards, the petitioner, who was employed as a Driver with the respondents No. 3-depart-ment, was charge-sheeted on 4.5.1990. An enquiry was also conducted and on the basis of enquiry report, the services of the petitioner were terminated on 24.3.1994. He raised an industrial dispute, which after thorough contest was dismissed by the Labour Court vide the impugned award dated 12.8.2004. Hence the present writ petition.
(3.) It may be mentioned here that on January 10, 2006 while issuing of notice, following contention of learned Counsel of the petitioner was recorded by the Division Bench of this Court: Learned Counsel for the petitioner very fairly states that the enquiry has been correctly held but the punishment of dismissal is too harsh viz-a-viz the facts averred accordingly. This aspect has not been considered by the Labour Court as envisaged under Section 11-A of the Act. Notice of motion for the aforestated only for 11.5.2006.;