CHANDER DUTT Vs. NEHRU YUVA KENDRA SANGATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this writ petition the petitioner, who was employed as a peon with the respondent, had challenged the award dated 23 -07 -2010 in ID Case No. 9/2007 whereby the relief of re -instatement in service with back wages was denied to him by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -I('the tribunal' in short) even after coming to the conclusion that his services had been illegally terminated by the respondent and only a lump -sum compensation of Rs. 25,000/ - was awarded to him. The petitioner was employed as a peon on daily wages with the respondent. His services were terminated w.e.f. 01.05.2004. He had then approached the competent authorities for his re -instatement in service but since he could not get that relief the dispute between him and the respondent was referred for adjudication to the Tribunal vide Reference order dated 25th January, 2007 with the following term of reference: -

(2.) THE petitioner filed his statement of claim before the Tribunal and claimed the termination of his services to be illegal. The respondent filed its written statement denying the allegations of illegal termination of the services of the petitioner and pleaded that he was never appointed as a regular employee as per the relevant Rules and after following due process of law but due to increase in work load he had been employed as daily wager and he was paid also for actual working days and also that as he was appointed for nation -wide project by the name of National Reconstruction Corps., which was undertaken on the instructions of Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, Government of India, and his engagement was co - terminus with that Project/Scheme or till his services were required and so rendering services by him for more than 240 days did not give him a right for regularization and Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act was not attracted in this case. It was thus claimed that the termination of the services of the petitioner was legal.

(3.) THE petitioner -workman felt aggrieved by the award of the Industrial Tribunal declining him the relief of reinstatement and back wages and so he filed this writ petition. The respondent -management did not feel aggrieved with the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that it had illegally terminated the services of the petitioner -workman and obviously so because no relief of reinstatement in service with back wages was granted to him.