P.B. Bajanthri, J. - (1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the award passed by the Labour Court dated 13.11.2014 vide Annexure P-1.
(2.) The respondent-workman was appointed as a Canal Patwari on 29.4.2008 on ad hoc basis. He was working under the office of the Executive Engineer and he was paid wages at D.C. Rate. His services were terminated in the year 2010. Thus, the respondent-workman raised an industrial dispute. The reference was decided by the Labour Court on 13.11.2014. The Labour Court framed the following issues. 4. The workman in his replication reiterated his earlier stand. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues we named:- (1) Whether there exists relationship of Master and servant between the parties OPW. (2) Whether termination of services of workman is justified and if to what relief he is entitled to OPW
(3.) The Labour Court after considering the evidence adduced by the then Executive Engineer, Viney Grover read with Exhibit M-1/C Agreement regarding supply of Labour and not Canal Patwari and also perusal of Roznamcha/Attendance Register Exhibit W-8 and Exhibit W-2 allowed the claim of the respondent workman while holding that he is entitled for reinstatement along with continuity of service and 50% back wages from the date of demand notice i.e. 18.8.2010.;