TALWINDER SINGH Vs. PO LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the appellant in this case is that though he had put in 240 days of service, his services were terminated without observing the due procedure as provided under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. He raised a dispute before the Labour Court. Various contentions were raised on behalf of the parties. The Labour Court did not examine any one of those contentions in the manner in which it should have been done. However, it dismissed the claim made by the appellant. When the matter was carried further by way of a writ petition, the High Court also dismissed the same by a cryptic order. Therefore he is in an unenviable position to reach this Court in an appeal by special leave.

(2.) Mr Kapoor, learned counsel appearing for Respondent 2 submitted that the Labour Court was persuaded by the fact that the appellant does not have the necessary qualification of a pump operator. Therefore, the award made by the Labour Court is in order.

(3.) We have carefully gone through the order of the Labour Court and nowhere is it considered whether the appellant possesses the necessary qualification of a pump operator or not. On the other hand, the contention put forth on behalf of the appellant is that he has put in 240 days of service as a pump operator and no order of termination has been sent to him.