OM PRAKASH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 27th March, 2014 whereby the court has given its findings against the petitioner and held that the claim of the petitioner was suffering with delay and latches and that it was not a case of retrenchment of the worker but a case of non-renewal of the contract of the worker on its expiry and also held that since the workman had not completed 240 days in the year prior to his termination, he was not entitled for any retrenchment compensation and had rejected the claim of the worker for reinstatement with full back wages and continuity in service.

(2.) The workman has assailed the said award on the grounds that the learned Presiding Officer has failed to consider the fact that the workman had worked with the management for 880 days from 01.07.90 to 31.03.95 and hence termination without advance notice was unjust, unfair and arbitrary.

(3.) It was further contented that the learned Presiding Officer had failed to consider the fact that the respondent had intentionally not informed the petitioner about the interview held in the year 1997 and also rejected him with the remarks of "over-age" in the year 1999. It is further contented that learned Presiding Officer has failed to consider the fact that the petitioner belong to weaker section having responsibilities of four unmarried daughters. On these grounds, it is prayed that the award be set aside. No notice of the writ petition has been issued to the respondents however counsel for the respondent had attended the proceedings and arguments are being heard on behalf of both the parties.