- (1.) This intra court appeal is directed against order dated 25. 11. 19 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant assailing the award dated 20. 5. 2019 passed by the Labour Court, Kota in Industrial Dispute Case No. 372/95, has been dismissed.
(2.) The respondent employed as ETP Operator-cum-Analyst in the Rajfed Soyabin Project, Kota (now known as TILAM Sangh Rajasthan, Kota), on being found guilty of charges of misconduct in a domestic enquiry conducted by the employer was dismissed from service vide order dated 6. 7. 1994. Being protected workman, the employer-TILAM Sangh sought approval of the Industrial Tribunal under the proviso to Section 33(2)(b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the Act"). During the pendency of the proceedings, the TILAM Sangh was declared 'Relief Undertaking' and proceedings under Section 33(2)(b) were put in abeyance. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent preferred the writ petition being No. 4293/97 before this Court, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 10. 9. 1997 observing that during the pendency of the proceedings under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act, the writ petition was not maintainable. The legality of the order passed by the learned Single Judge was questioned by the respondent by way of special appeal, which was allowed by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 19. 2. 2008 with the directions in the following terms: "(i) Impugned order of learned single Judge shall stand set aside. (ii) Respondent Employer is directed to provisionally reinstate the appellant workman within thirty days from today. (iii) Reinstatement of appellant workman shall be prospective and he will not be entitled to back wages. (iv) This order shall remain in force till the adjudication of the proceedings pending under Section 33(2)(b) of ID Act before the Industrial Tribunal Kota. (v) There shall be no order as to costs. "
(3.) Before filing the writ petition before the learned Single Judge as aforesaid, the respondent had raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer. On failure of the conciliation proceedings, the Conciliation Officer submitted the failure report to the State Government, which in its turn referred the dispute for adjudication to the Labour Court, Kota vide notification dated 5. 10. 1995.;