- (1.) Although manifold contentions have been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this writ petition which involves a challenge to the retrenchment of petitioner from the service of Foresh Department brought about with effect from 15.11.92, in my opinion it is not necessary to make an adjudication on all the points because I am of the considered opinion that the impugned retrenchment of petitioner which has been brought about by Annexure-R. 1 dated 13.11.92 issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Social Forestry, Sawaimadhoupur, deserves to be quashed only on the ground of non-compliance of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
(2.) Facts of the case, which have come on record, show that the petitioner was engaged as Beldar (daily wager) on 1.8.90 and he served the Department under the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Social Forestry, Sawaimadhopur till the date of termination of his service. Petitioner's plea is that before terminating his service, which amounts to retrenchment, provisions of Section 25-F of 1947 Act have not been complied with. Another plea of petitioner is that principle of last come first go has not been followed and yet another plea is that persons similarly situated have been retained in service.
(3.) Respondents have made an attempt to justify the retrenchment of petitioner by stating that on account of the non-availability of work, action for retrenchment of service of the petitioner was taken by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Social Forestry, Sawaimadhopur. A draft for sum of Rs. 1144 towards notice pay and retrenchment compensation was prepared by the Office. The petitioner refused to accept the notice of retrenchment as well as the draft meant for the notice pay and retrenchment compensation.;