TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. S.B. Gadodia, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) ADMITTED case of the parties is that the concerned workman joined the services on 9.10.1993 and his services were terminated on 7.10.1984. He therefore, worked for a period which was less than 95 days and not 120 days or more as has been wrongly stated by the Presiding Officer. Labour Court, Dhanbad in paragraph 8. The stand of the Management was that the concerned workman had never been sponsored by the Employment Exchange and that his appointment was on account of extraneous consideration of the then Chairman, of Jharia Water Board who had thrown to the winds all Rules and Regulations and therefore, as per decision of the Government, all such appointments were terminated. The Labour Court does not answer this question at all nor deals with this issue. All that he says is that the issue relating to the Employment Exchange is not at all a relevant factor because the vacancy was not notified by the Jharia Mines Board of Health. In other words the Labour Court had skirted the issue. In fact, there is no explanation nor any defence by the workman also in relation to the aforementioned specific charge/stand of the management.
(3.) ANOTHER feature which compels this Court to come to a conclusion that the Award is perverse is because at paragraph 7, the Presiding Officer has drawn inferences and says that the fact relating to retention of two persons named therein makes him to come to "safe conclusion" that whereas the others have been allowed to continue yet the concerned workman has been singled out and therefore, this is a case of gross discrimination. He does not deal with the main issue and the stand of the Management to the effect that large number of employments made by the then Chairman had been found to be doubtful and therefore, the Management had taken the extreme step.;