Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the award of the learned Labour Court dated 11.2.2000-(Annex. 7) by which the claim of the respondent-workman has been accepted and the termination order dated 23.5.94 has been quashed.
(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the appropriate Government made a reference to the Central Industrial Tribunal whether the termination of the service of the workman vide order dated 23.5.94 was legal and justified and if not to what relief he was entitled for. Before the learned Labour Court both the parties adduced evidence and it was found that the workman had joined the service on 22.6.93 and he was asked orally on 23.5.94 that his services stood terminated. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the workman filed the Writ Petition No. 5370/97 which was dismissed vide order dated 8.7.98 with liberty to approach the learned Labour Court. Before the learned Labour Court plea was taken by the present petitioner employer that the respondent workman obtained the employment by misrepresentation as after his joining it came to the notice of the employer that he was possessing higher qualification than the maximum qualification prescribed for the post and thus he was not eligible for the post of Peon. The workman filed the reply that there was no misrepresentation at the time of filling up the form. He had mentioned that he had passed IXth Class and failed in Xth and he would produce the relevant certificate and he did so.
(3.) The main issue before the learned Labour Court had been whether the workman had obtained the employment by misrepresentation. The advertisement was issued asking the applications from the persons who had earlier worked temporarily for a particular period but the eligibility was that the applicant must be VIIth passed but he should not have passed VIIIth Class. Applicant was asked to furnish the information regarding his qualification. In the form filled up by the workman he had shown himself in Column No. 3 as VIIth passed while working temporarily but he did not furnish the information regarding his qualification on the date of filing the application. Subsequently, complaint was received by the Establishment and after investigation it came to its notice that he had passed IXth which ultimately was also accepted by the workman, therefore, the termination order was passed for concealment of fact and obtaining the employment by misrepresentation. On this issue, the learned Labour Court has recorded the findings of fact that the workman did not disclose that he possessed the qualification higher than VIIth. So far as other issues are concerned they were decided in favour of the workman and a finding of fact has been recorded that he had completed 240 days in a calendar year counting backwards from the date of retrenchment and his termination was found to be in flagrant violation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act as he had not been removed after holding the disciplinary enquiry. However, the learned Labour Court held that termination of the workman was bad and the Management would be at liberty to hold an enquiry and remove the workman or remove him after complying with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. Hence this petition by the Management.;