GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS,J. - (1.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the Assistant Engineer, PHED, Sub Division Taranagar, District Churu, to challenge the award passed by the Judge, Labour Court, Bikaner dated 29.3.1997, whereby the Judge, Labour Court, Bikaner passed an award in favour of the respondent workman and set aside the order of termination dated 31.3.1984 on the ground that it is in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short hereinafter referred-to as "the Act") and passed an order for reinstatement in service and full back wages with effect from the date of award.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the award impugned is totally unjustified for the reason that the respondent workman himself left the job and did not complete 240 days in one calendar year, therefore, the finding given by the Judge, Labour Court with regard to working for more than 240 days in one calendar year is totally erroneous. Learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that the award impugned suffers from material irregularity and illegality because without any evidence, the finding is given by the Judge, Labour Court that the termination of the respondent workman is in violation of Sections 25F and 25G of the Act, therefore, the award impugned deserves to be quashed.
(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent workman argued that the Judge, Labour Court, has passed an award with due application of mind and after taking into consideration the entire facts and documentary evidence, which is produced on record, so also while taking adverse inference for not producing the record before the court, therefore, the finding given by the Judge, Labour Court, with regard to the working period of more than 240 days in one calendar year, is based upon sound appreciation of evidence as well as facts, therefore, the award impugned ought not to be interfered with.;