Govind Mathur, J. - (1.) BY this petition for writ a challenge is given to the correctness, propriety and validity of the award dt. 12.10.1992 passed by the Labour Court, Bikaner in Industrial Dispute Case No. 23/87. The appropriate government under its notification dt. 24.04.1987 referred an industrial dispute to Labour Court, Bikaner for its adjudication in the terms, whether termination of workman Sh. Bhajan Singh on 28.08.1984 by Divisional Manager, RSRTC, Bikaner is legal and justified? If not, then for what relief and amount the workman is entitled?
(2.) THE respondent -workman was employed as Conductor on daily rate basis with employer Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation on 10.10.1983. His name was struck off from the service roll on 28.08.1984. After striking off from service roll the petitioner submitted an application dt. 25.01.1986 to the General Manager (Traffic), Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur for re -employment in service of the Corporation. The General Manager (Traffic) by a communication dt. 12.12.1986 instructed the respondent -workman to submit an application afresh for getting fresh appointment with the Divisional Manager, RSRTC, Bikaner. In the communication aforesaid it was made clear that in the event of re -employment the workman shall not be entitled for any benefit for past services. In pursuant to the letter dt. 12.12.1986 the respondent -workman submitted an application to the Divisional Manager, RSRTC, Bikaner, accordingly, by an office order dt. 22.12.1986 the workman was employed afresh on daily rate basis as Conductor. In the order aforesaid also it was made clear that all the conditions mentioned in earlier orders shall be applicable while making re -employment. After joining service in pursuant to the order dt. 22.12.1986 the workman raised an industrial dispute with regard to his termination from service w.e.f. 28.08.1984 and that was ultimately referred for its adjudication to Labour Court, Bikaner by the notification dt. 24.04.1987. Before the Labour Court, in reply to the statement of claim, the specific stand of the employer was that while accepting employment afresh the workman accepted the condition that he will not claim any benefit relating to his past service, and therefore, by acquiescence he cannot challenge the order of termination or also claim any benefit relating to past service. The Labour Court by the award impugned held the termination of the workman w.e.f. 28.08.1984 bad, and as such, declared the workman entitled for receiving wages for the period from 28.08.1984 to 22.12.1986 i.e. the date of re -employment.
(3.) WHILE giving challenge to the award impugned the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Labour Court materially erred while not appreciating the fact that the respondent -workman was reemployed under the order dt. 22.12.1986 with the conditions referred in the communication dt. 12.12.1986 to the effect that he will not claim any benefit for his past service and as such whatever claim made by the respondent workman under the dispute concerned was unjustified as it was waived by him.;