S.N. Pathak, J. - (1.) In view of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, case was taken up through Video Conferencing and heard at length. Concerned lawyers had no objection with regard to the proceeding which was held through Video Conferencing and there was no complaint in respect to audio and video clarity and quality and after hearing at length, the matter was reserved for final disposal. PRAYER OF THE PETITIONER - MANAGEMENT
(2.) Petitioner-Management has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the Award dated 08.05.2009, pronounced on 27.05.2009, passed by Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad, passed in Reference Case No. 76 of 1997, whereby a direction has been issued to the petitioner - Management for regularization in service of the respondent - workman. CASE OF THE PETITIONER - MANAGEMENT
(3.) The case of the petitioner - Management is that the respondent - workman was appointed on 04.12.1982 purely on casual basis. The workman has never pleaded that either any appointment letter was issued to him or he was appointed against any sanctioned post or his appointment was made after following any selection procedure or through employment exchange. The workman even did not bring on record anything to show that he was having requisite qualification for being appointed to the post of Hindi Typist in Food Corporation of India. On 06.05.1984, the casual service of the workman was terminated which was challenged by him before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 at Dhanbad. Vide Award dated 08.08.1990, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 at Dhanbad held that the workman completed 240 days of service and since he had not been paid retrenchment compensation, so his termination of service was wrong and a direction was made for his reinstatement. After his reinstatement in service on 10.05.1991, the workman is continuing in service on casual basis.;