LAWS(DLH)-2006-8-186

JAVED OFFSET PRINTERS Vs. PRESIDING OFFICERS

Decided On August 01, 2006
JAVED OFFSET PRINTERS Appellant
V/S
PRESIDING OFFICERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition petitioner has challenged the Award of Labour Court dated 8.2.1996.

(2.) Brief facts are that two Workmen Abdul Qayum and Naeem were working with the petitioner as machine man and ink man respectively on monthly wages Rs.750/- and Rs.300/- per month respectively. Both lodged claim with Labour Commissioner about non payment of wages as per Minimum Wages Act. They also raised demand for other legal facilities. It is alleged that the petitioner instead of giving the facilities as per different labour laws and wages as per Minimum Wages Act, terminated the services of both the Workmen on 8.8.1984 without giving any reason or charge sheet or holding an inquiry. Workmen raised industrial dispute and reference was made to the Labour Court to the following effect:- "Whether the services of S/Shri Abdul Qayum and Naeem have been terminated illegally and/ or unjustifiable if so to what relief are they entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect"

(3.) The management filed written statement and assailed the claims of the Workmen saying that the Workmen had abandoned the job and failed to report for duty after 7.8.1984 despite having called upon to do so repeatedly. It was further stated that Abdul Qayum was not interested to work. He had taken a sum of Rs.2000/- as advance and paid back only Rs.300/- by way of adjustment from the salary and in order to avoid adjustment he left the services and he also took Naeem with him who was his nephew. Both of them deliberately remained absent from duty since July 1984 onwards and despite management's asking to re- join the duty they did not re-join the duty. In the written statement management offered that Workmen could still join. In the rejoinder Workmen denied the averments made by the management and reiterated Workmens" claim. Labour Court framed additional issues which reads as under:- 1.Whether the workman abandoned the service in August, 1984 despite being called to report for duty, if so, its effect"