NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA,J. - (1.) This special appeal has been filed by the appellant Vishnu Dutt Sharma against the order dated 19.11.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition challenging the award dated 12.1.2018 passed by the learned Labour Court-First, Jaipur whereby the claim set up by the appellant was rejected by the learned Labour Court.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was initially appointed as chowkidar on daily wage basis on 16.12.1989 in the office of Swai Man Singh Hospital, Jaipur. His services were terminated by verbal order. The appellant submitted a civil suit before the learned ACJM No.7, Jaipur which was rejected due to lack of jurisdiction. The Government referred the matter for adjudication vide its Reference No. i-1(1) (1440)/Jfu/92 dated 3.3.1993 before the competent authority of the State Government to the learned Labour Court-First, Jaipur which is as under : [.....OMMITED TO VARNACULAR TEXT....] The learned Labour Court vide order dated 12.1.2018 dismissed the reference. That after, the appellant moved before the High Court whereby the writ petition was dismissed vide impugned order dated 19.11.2018 by learned Single Judge.
(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned orders dated 12.1.2018 and 19.11.2018 are perverse and contrary to the material available on record. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Labour Court did not appreciate that the appellant had never worked as Home- guard in the SMS Hospital and treating him as Home-guard was not a proper finding. He submitted that the learned Single Judge upheld the award without properly appreciating the relevant evidence and material available on record. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant had worked in the SMS Hospital from 16.12.1989 to 19.2.1991 and thus he is entitled to get protection as per Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent has not complied with the provisions of sections 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.;