LAWS(DLH)-2012-9-458

HANDLOOM TEXTORIUM Vs. GUNESHWAR RAI

Decided On September 27, 2012
HANDLOOM TEXTORIUM Appellant
V/S
GUNESHWAR RAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present petition the Petitioner challenges the award dated 11th July, 2007 whereby the Respondent was directed to be reinstated with full back wages and other consequential benefits with effect from 7 th March, 1999.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the Petitioner contends that the learned Trial Court grossly erred in appreciating the evidence on record in the form of receipt Ex.WW1/M1 duly signed by the Respondent. The Respondent admitted that he had signed the receipt wherein it was clearly written that he worked with the management with effect from 14th July, 1992 and on 12th October, 1992 he took the payment of Rs. 1200.00 being the salary for the month of September, 1992 and thus settled all his claims. The date of termination i.e. 14th October, 1992 is not disputed by the parties. However the case of the Petitioner is that the Respondent was employed only on 14th July, 1992 whereas the Respondent claims that he had been working from 1983. However, the Respondent had failed to prove this fact, as there is no document or any other evidence proved before the learned Labour Court in this regard. Since 240 days had not been completed when the Respondent was terminated, the provisions of Section 25-F, 25-G of the Industrial Dispute Act (in short the ID Act) were not applicable and no directions for reinstatement with back wages could have been given.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Respondent was terminated on 14th October, 1992 and thus he raised a dispute on which the following reference was sent for adjudication under Section 10(1)(c) and 12(5) of the Industrial Dispute Act: