JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) By this writ petition, a challenge has been made to the award dated 10.8.1998, where reference has been answered in favour of the respondent workman. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that without challenging the finding of fact recorded by the Labour Court, the petition is pressed in regard to relief granted to the respondent workman.
(2.) It is stated that respondent workman was engaged as daily rated employee and worked hardly for few months. The termination of the respondent workman is held to be illegal being violative of the provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act'). The Labour Court awarded reinstatement with continuity in service and back wages by ignoring the nature of appointment. Counsel submits that an employee not engaged as per the rules rattier worked only on daily rated basis for few days, has no right of reinstatement in view of catena of judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court.
(3.) Referring to the written statement before the labour Court, nature of the appointment of the respondent workman is shown and even noted by the Labour Court. It was also stated therein that work assigned to petitioner was of intermittent nature and no work now exists. When the nature of the appointment of the workman and all the relevant facts regarding his status coupled with the fact that his appointment was not in accordance with the rules were narrated, the Labour Court should have awarded compensation to the respondent workman instead of reinstatement with full back wages. The prayer is accordingly made to interfere in the impugned award and thereby order of reinstatement with full back wages may be substituted by the award of compensation. This is more so when during the pendency of the writ petition, respondent workman has been extended benefit under section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act of 1947') as he never tried to seek vacation of the stay order granted by this Court, thereby petitioner never tried for his reinstatement.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.