R.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) This special appeal arises out of the judgment dated 22-2- 2007, whereby the learned Single Judge has modified the award of Labour Court dated 29-3-2001, and has directed the appellant to give an opportunity of re-employment to the respondent, Gopal, within a period of two months from the date of the judgment.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondent, Gopal, claimed that on 1-7-1977, he was appointed as a Beldar in Public Works Department ('PWD', for short). He continued to discharge his duties till 30-8-1989. However, on 30-8-1989, his services were terminated without giving him any notice of one month, or salary in lieu thereof, and without giving him the retrenchment compensation. Aggrieved by the termination order, an industrial dispute was raised, which was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. Vide award dated 29-3-2001, the learned Labour Court dismissed the claim of the respondent, and held his termination to be legal and valid. Aggrieved by the said award, Gopal filed a writ petition before this court. Vide order dated 22-2-2007, the learned Single Judge has modified the award as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal by the State before this Court.
(3.) Mr. N.A. Naqvi, the learned Additional Advocate General, has vehemently contended that learned Single Judge has erred in concluding that the appellant had violated the requirement of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the Act', for short). After going through the evidence produced before the Labour Court, the learned Labour Court had clearly concluded that the workman has not been able to show as to who were the persons, who were continued in service, or who were persons, who were freshly recruited after his dismissal from service. According to learned counsel, the learned Single Judge has not stated any reason for disagreeing with the finding given by the Labour Court.;