HARYANA MINERALS LIMITED Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the award dated 11th February, 2005 in ID No. 36/1995 passed by the, Central Government Industrial tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Rajendra Bhawan, Rajindra Place, New delhi in case titled Rajinder Kumar Vs. The Secretary, Haryana minerals Ltd. , Nizampur Road, Narnuli, District Mahendargarh, haryana. By the impugned award the termination of services of the respondent/workman Rajinder Kumar who was a daily rated worker w. e. f. 1st November, 1991 with the petitioner/management was held neither to be legal nor justified. But instead of directing the reinstatement of the workman the Ld. Presiding Officer of the Tribunal directed the payment of compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the respondent/workman within a period of one month of the publication of award failing which it was directed that he shall be further entitled to get 12% interest per annum on the entire back wages.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the respondent/workman is stated to have been employed by the petitioner/management as a daily rated worker w. e. f. 1st July, 1989 in the branch office of Haryana Minerals Ltd. District Bhiwani, Haryana. The respondent/workman has stated that his conduct during the service tenure was satisfactory yet no formal letter was ever issued to him in respect of terminating his services. It is alleged by him that he reported for duty till 11th November, 1991 on which date he was told verbally that his services were no longer required. By that date he had rendered service of more than 240 days in a year, and accordingly, he was entitled to protection under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He challenged the termination of his services as being illegal and unjustified because of which the Ministry of Labour, Central government vide letter dated 2nd March, 1995 referred the following dispute to the Central Government, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour court in the following terms where:

(3.) THE petitioner/management took a plea that the respondent/workman was working with the petitioner/management in the mines, but he of his own stopped reporting for duty w. e. f. 31st october, 1991. On account of this unauthorized and continuous desertion from the workplace his name was removed from the rolls of the miners.