COMMISSIONER OF SERICULTURE Vs. SRIPAT LAXMAN HATTIKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the State under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the award passed by the learned Addl. Labour Court, Hubli, in Reference No. 60/1996 (Sri. Sripat S/o Laxman Hattikar Vs. The Management of Senior Sericulture Inspector and another), dated 5.12.2009.

(2.) By the said award, the learned District Judge and Presiding Officer, Addl. Labour Court, Hubli, found that the termination of the respondent labour on 1.10.1983 was contrary to the provisions of Sec. 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (for brevity, 'the Act'), since in the immediately preceding year from 30.09.1982 till 1.10.1983, the respondent had actually worked for 207 days and adding thereof to general holidays and Sundays in that year, the number of working days would count to more than 240 days and since he was terminated from the service orally without complying the mandatory provisions of Sec. 25-F of the Act, the Labour Court instead of reinstating the respondent workman back in service, in lieu of that, directed for payment of lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000.00 to the respondent workman by the impugned order.

(3.) Learned AGA, Mr. M. Kumar, appearing for the petitioners-State submitted that the said impugned order was passed by the learned Labour Court, after a remand of case by the High Court in WP No. 43744/2004(L-TER) with a direction to the respondent to implead the Director of Sericulture as a party to the proceedings and to dispose of the case on merits. Upon such remand, the Labour Court has passed the impugned order. He also submitted that after the impugned retrenchment order on 1.10.1983, the respondent workman had approached initially the Labour Court in the year 1996, after a gap of 13 years by Reference No. 60/1996 and such a belated claim ought to have been rejected by the learned Labour Court.