- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Though the respondents have been noticed and have appeared, but today no one has appeared on their behalf and the matter has been taken up finally.
(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the award dated 18.07.2003 contained in Reference Case No. 2 of 2000 (Annexure-9) which has answered the reference against him on the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner. The following reference was made before the learned Labour Court, Deoghar; which is quoted hereinunder:- "Whether the termination of services of workman Md. Israil Ansari of M/s. Phoolin Sanstha, Mahila Chetna Vikash Kendra Deoghar is justified! If not, what relief, he is entitled to!"
(3.) It was the contention of the petitioner made through his written statement filed before the learned Labour Court that he was appointed by the Management on 19.7.1992 and had been working on different posts such as Worker, Supervisor etc. continuously till he was orally dismissed from service. He was a permanent employee of the management and comes under the purview of the definition of the workman as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act. He, accordingly was entitled to salary or wages, which used to be paid and was deposited in his savings Bank Account No. 93/49 in the Allahabad Bank before his termination. Though he has represented number of times before the institution but without assigning any reason or notice, he was dismissed from service on 23.1.1998. Earlier he had submitted his resignation on 11.11.1994, which was not accepted and on oral assurance by the management to enhance his salary he continued in service. No domestic inquiry was conducted before his termination. Therefore, he has raised the industrial dispute in relation to his dismissal from service, which has been referred for adjudication before the learned Labour court.;