- (1.) Being aggrieved by the determination made in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20753/2013, declining interference with the award dated 11.10.2013, passed by the learned Labour Court and Industrial Tribunal, Ajmer in Reference Case No. I.C.R. 39/11, the writ petitioner is in appeal against the judgment and order dated 20.01.2014, rendered in the writ petition. We have heard Mr. Kailash Chandra Sharma, the learned counsel for the appellant/writ-petitioner.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts, indispensable for the present adjudication, are that the appellant/writ-petitioner, by order dated 22.10.2005, was appointed as a driver with the respondent- Nigam on contract basis until further orders at a fixed pay of Rs. 2100 per month. The conditions whereunder the contract employment was provided, inter alia mentioned that his engagement was purely temporary and was terminable without prior notice, either if his services were not required, or were found to be unsatisfactory, or if he was found to be guilty of misbehaviour with any officer/employee of the respondent- Nigam. Eventually, by order dated 21.8.2007, his services were terminated on the ground that in violation of the conditions, subject to which he had been engaged on contract basis, he had caused a fatal accident with the vehicle driven by him. The appellant/writ-petitioner, having raised an industrial dispute, the same was referred to the learned Labour Court and Industrial Tribunal, Ajmer, which by its award : dated 30.07.2012, maintained the termination of his services.
(3.) Being aggrieved, the appellant/writ-petitioner approached this Court with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13271/2012, which was disposed of on 18.3.2013 by remitting the matter to the learned Labour Court with a direction for fresh disposal after giving opportunity to the parties to lead evidence on the charge against him. The respondent-Nigam was left at liberty to prove the charge and the appellant/writ-petitioner to rebut the same by adducing respective evidence. This order was passed noticing the fact that the termination of services of the appellant/writ-petitioner was in view of the fact that he had caused an; accident of the vehicle driven by him, which entitled him to an opportunity of hearing before being ousted from the service.;