JUDGEMENT
Govind Mathur, J. -
(1.) BY this petition for writ, a challenge is given to the award dt. 07.08.1995 passed by the Labour Court, Bikaner in Labour Case No. 43/1990 answering a reference made to it by the appropriate government under a notification dt. 8th March, 1990 in the terms that "whether termination of workman Shri Rajesh S/o Shri Sardara Ram Chaukidar by the Managing Director/Security Officer Uttari Rajasthan Sahakari Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., Bikaner w.e.f. 17.11.1987 is just and valid? If not, then for what relief and amount, the workman is entitled -
(2.) AS per the facts available, the respondent Rajesh Kumar was employed as Chaukidar at Rathi Farm under control of the Uttari Rajasthan Sahakari Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., Bikaner. By an order dt. 17.11.1987, he was discontinued from service on the count of his negligence resulting outward movement of three bulls from the farm premises. Being aggrieved by the same, an industrial dispute was raised by Shri Rajesh Kumar and that was ultimately referred for its adjudication to the Labour Court, Bikaner. While contesting claim of the workman, the petitioner came forward with a case that Shri Rajesh Kumar was employed by Contractor, therefore, he was not a workman as defined under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1947") and also that even as per Shri Rajesh Kumar also, there was a contract to supply security personnels with one Shri Karan Singh and aforesaid Karan Singh was making payment of the salary to him. Learned labour Court while negativating stand of the employer treated Shri Rajesh Kumar, a workman and thus applied the provisions of the Act of 1947. The labour Court held termination of the workman, a retrenchment effected in violation of mandatory condition precedents to do so. A direction, thus, was given to reinstate the workman with back wages and continuity in service. The petitioner has reiterated all the contentions urged before the Labour Court while challenging the award impugned.
(3.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.