MANGAL PRASAD Vs. MODERN FOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-workman questioning the correctness of the Award dated 25.03.2003 passed by the Labour Court whereby his claim of reinstatement in service lodged against his employer, the respondent no. 1 herein, with back wages was rejected after rejecting his case that his services had been terminated illegally and unjustifiably.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts that led to the filing of this petition are that the petitioner workman, as per his case, was employed with the respondent-management in 1986 and on 18.08.1989 his services were terminated illegally. He had then approached the labour authorities for his re-instatement in service but since he could not get that relief the dispute between him and the respondent-management was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court vide Reference dated 7 th September, 1990. The following was the term of reference:-

(3.) The petitioner-workman filed his statement of claim before the Labour Court and claimed termination of his services to be illegal due to non-compliance of the requirements of Sections 25-F and G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He pleaded that his signatures were being obtained every year by the respondent no. 1-management on some papers to show fresh employment everytime so that he could not claim permanence in job. The respondent-management filed its written statement denying his claim of illegal termination from the services and stated that he was a casual worker who was employed temporarily to meet the requirements of the seasonal work and he had not worked for 240 days and had worked for 151 days only and was paid as a daily wager and, therefore, he could not claim benefit of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. It was further stated that since there was no work in the respondent's-factory the petitioner was not given any work.