- (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the award dated June 17, 1993 passed by the Labour Court, Jaipur in case No. LCR 85/1991rameshwar Prasad v. Director. State Insurance and Provident Fund Department. Admitted facts which are borne out from the record of the case are that the workman Rameshwar Prasad was appointed in the service of the State Insurance Department with effect from July 2. 1985 and his service was terminated with effect from July 5, 1986. Against the termination of his service, the workman raised a dispute. Conciliation proceedings were held. When the parties failed to arrive at a settlement, the Conciliation Officer submitted his failure report to the State Government. By its notification dated March 5, 1991 issued under Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the State Government made reference of the dispute to the Labour Court. Jaipur for adjudication.
(2.) IN his statement of claim, filed before the Labour Court the workman pleaded that he had worked for a period of 240 days in a period of 12 months counted from the date of termination of his service and since his service had been terminated without compliance of requirements of Sections 25-F and 25-G, he had a right to be reinstated in service. He also pleaded that persons junior to him had been retained in service and the rule of 'last come, first go', has not been followed. He pleaded that no seniority list had been prepared before terminating service of the petitioner. In the statement of claim, the petitioner also pleaded that he was unemployed and was facing starvation. In its reply, the employer pleaded that the workman had been engaged as a daily wage class IV servant and one of the conditions of his service was that he could be removed at any time without prior notice. His service was not regular between July 2. 1985 to July 5, 1986. He has not disclosed names of the j unior persons. The employer pleaded that termination of service of the workman does not fall within the scope of the term 'retrenchment' under Section 2 (oo) of the 1947 Act.
(3.) PETITIONER gave his statement in support of his claim while the Department produced Shri Madan Lal Verma and Shri Abdul Razak as its witnesses.;