RAJESH KUMAR,J - (1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents, in spite of filing Vakalatnama.
(2.) The industrial dispute has been raised against the order of dismissal dated 17.12.1998, which has been referred as Reference No. 75 of 2014 before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (No. 1), Dhanbad.
(3.) Entire award dated 06.07.2015 is quoted hereinbelow: Award By order No. -L-29012/4/2014 IR-(M), dated. 09/07/2014, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of powers conferred by clause(d) of Sub-Section (1) and Sub-Section(2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal: Schedule "Whether the action of the management of Bokaro Steel Plant (SAIL) in dismissing Sri Jishu Mahto from the service vide order dated 17.12.1998 in fair and justified? If not, to what relief concerned workman is entitled?" 2. The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on 21.07.2014 After receipt of reference, both parties are noticed. The Sponsoring Union files their written statement on 13.08.2014. And the management files their written statement-cum-rejoinder on 19.11.2014. 3. The point involved in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services for long absenteeism. 4. During preliminary hearing it is revealed that the case is dismissed or workman for long absence on duty. But he has already out of service for 17 years. It is felt to give another chance to the workman to serve. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I hold that he be taken into job as a fresh employee. But the workman be kept under probation for a period of two year and his performance report be given to the under signed. Therefore the question of back wages does not arise at all. This is my award. ;