MAHADEV Vs. MUNISWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays that this Court may be pleased to send for the records ending with the order of the presiding officer, labour court, Bangalore, in Application No. 30 of 1962 on his file, by issuing a writ of certiorari and quash the order in question.

(2.) Sri G. S. Ullal, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the impugned order is liable to the struck down for two reasons, namely, (i) the labour court had no jurisdiction to go into the facts of retrenchment as the same was a disputed question; and (ii) the retrenchment put forward by the respondent, on the admitted facts of the case, does not amount to a retrenchment in law and therefore no retrenchment compensation could have been granted.

(3.) It is unfortunate that the respondent was not represented in this case.