- (1.) THE writ -petitioner workman has challenged the award dated 25.01.1997 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi in Reference Case No. 10 of 1998, whereby the Labour Court has held that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief whatsoever claimed after holding that the petitioner voluntarily left the service without information after 28.08.1986 resulting in his termination from service by strucking off his name from the roll of the Company and it was not a case of victimisation. The reference before the Labour Court was as under : '' "Whether the termination of Sri Chandrika Singh workman of M/s. Chhotanagpur Rope Works Mahilong, Ranchi is proper and justified? If not whether he is entitled to reinstatement or/and any other relief -
(2.) ON the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following points were formulated by the Labour Court for determination : '' "(i) Whether service of the concerned workman was terminated or he abandoned the service himself? (ii) Whether termination of the concerned workman is due to victimisation? (iii) Whether termination is just and proper? (iv) Whether the concerned workman is entitled to any relief - So far as the point No. I formulated by the Labour Court is concerned, it appears from the impugned award that after discussing the entire materials and the evidence led by the parties, and also the pleadings. the Labour Court arrived at a finding that the workman voluntarily left the service without information after 28.08.1986 resulting in his termination from service by strucking off his name from the roll of the Company.
(3.) SO far the second point formulated by the Labour Court is concerned, the finding is also against the workman on the basis of the evidence on record.;