VINIT KUMAR MATHUR,J. - (1.) The petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs: "(a) By an appropriate writ, order and direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of helper from the date of his initial appointment. (b) By an appropriate writ, order and direction in the nature thereof, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner regular pay scale on the post of Helper with effect from the date the persons junior to him have been allowed the said benefit. (c) By an appropriate writ, order and direction the respondents may be directed to pay entire arrear of wages to the petitioner with 12% p.a. interest from the date of due to the date of actual payment. (d) Any other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the petitioners."
(2.) The petitioner was initially appointed as a daily wages employee from 26.06.1985. He was initially assigned the work of Jaldhari and to clean vehicles of the respondents department. Services of the petitioner were terminated on 14.09.1989. Aggrieved of this termination, the petitioner approached the Labour Court by raising an industrial dispute. The learned Labour Court on a reference being made adjudicated the same and vide order dated 14.09.1989 held that the termination of the petitioner is illegal and bad. Therefore, the petitioner was held to be in continuous service of the department with the directions for reinstatement and payment of wages of 50% were awarded.
(3.) Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation filed a writ petition before this Court being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2444/2003 assailing the validity of order dated 14.09.1989 passed by learned Labour Court and after hearing the parties the writ petition was dismissed on 08.01.2002 by the following observations:- "Learned Labour Court after adjudication of dispute and taking note of material on record, recorded a finding of fact about working of respondent workman from 26.06.1985 to 14.09.1989 and certainly for the period of services rendered by him, he had worked fro more than 240 days in preceding 12 months of his termination and the petitioner was under obligation to comply with Section 25-F of the Act, 1947. The finding recorded by Labour Court based on material on record, this Court finds no manifest error or infirmity warranting interference therein. As regards back wages, respondent workman has specifically averred not only in statement of claim but also in his statement/ affidavit recorded during adjudication of Reference, about the fact that he remained unemployed as a result of impugned termination - against which no contrary material has been placed on record, in the opinion of this Court, learned Labour Court has exercised its judicious discretion in granting 50% back wages in the facts of instant case, which does not call for interference. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs.";