- (1.) Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-workman, Sanjay Kumar assailing the impugned award dated 13th February, 2008 passed by the Labour Court, Ambala, whereby reference has been declined and the petitioner-workman has been held not entitled to reinstatement into service. Labour Court has held that the petitioner- workman was an employee of one J.S.Tanwar, Ex-BSF, Prop. Of Aman Security and Detectives (Regd.) and was employed as a Ward Servant by Aman Security and Detectives (Regd.) and had been deputed to General Hospital, Sector 6, Panchkula to perform the job, by the contractor. It seems that General Hospital, Sector 6, Panchkula had outsourced certain jobs through various contractors. The following finding of fact has been recorded by the Labour Court: "Hence, in these circumstances, the contents of the aforesaid letter Ex.MW1/A cannot be held to be liable to be discarded, the claim of the management that the petitioner- workman was employed as a Ward Servant and had been deputed as such by the said M/s Aman Security & Detectives (Regd.) in its Hospital, being complementary and supplementary plea and not being a contradictory or inconsistent plea."
(2.) Labour Court has further held that petitioner-workman was a daily wager, and has held as under: "16. Therefore, in view of the ratio of law laid down in a number of citations i.e. Municipal Council, Smrala V. Raj Kumar, (2006) 3 SCC 81, Reserve Bank of India Vs. Gopinath Sharma (2006) 6 SCC 221, S M Nilajkar and others V. Telecom District Manager, Karnataka, (2003) 4 SCC 27, and Tek Chand V. The Presiding Officer and others CWP No. 18587 of 2004 decided on 20.7.07 by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, wherein, it was observed that the termination of the services of the Daily Wager will not amount to retrenchment and will be covered by the exception (bb) to the Section (oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the petitioner just cannot be held entitled to any relief whatsoever. 17. It was further observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3657 and Gangadhar Pillai V. Siemens Limited, 2007 1 SCC 533 that an employee employed as a daily wager cannot be reinstated/ regularized in public employment which is governed by the rules and regulations. The ratio of law laid down in the citations aforesaid is fully applicable in the instant case as admittedly in the present case, it is not the case of the petitioner that while making an offer of appointment to him, the management had complied with the requirements as laid down in the statue or statutory rules or even otherwise the same was, in any way, in consonance or in conformity with the statutory rules and the instructions or the policy laid down by the Government of Haryana. Therefore, in these circumstances, it has to be held that the present case is covered by the second part of the exception (bb) to the section 2 (oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act and as such the provisions of Section 25-F to H of the ID Act in the instant case were not attracted. Resultantly, the petitioner just cannot be held entitled to any relief. Accordingly, this issue is hereby decided in favour of the respondent-management and against the petitioner-workman."
(3.) We have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned award. We do not find any infirmity in the award of the Labour Court. The same is just and appropriate. Therefore no interference is called for. Present writ petition is dismissed.;