DIRECTOR GENERAL WORKS CPWD Vs. EKNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these writ petitions are proposed to be decided by this common order because they both relate to the same employee Mr. Eknath employed with the CPWD as daily wager.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case relevant for disposal of these writ petitions are that the respondent Mr. Eknath was appointed as Khalasi Beldar as daily wager on muster roll with the CPWD (the petitioner herein) on 12. 10. 1984. His services were terminated by the petitioner w. e. f. 01. 09. 2000. At the time of termination of his services, an industrial dispute raised by the respondent workman for his regularization being ID No. 82/1995 was pending adjudication before the Industrial Adjudicator. The petitioner did not take approval of the industrial Adjudicator under Section 33 (2) (b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for termination of his services w. e. f. 01. 09. 2000 though an industrial dispute for his regularization was pending adjudication before the Industrial Adjudicator on that date. The respondent, therefore, filed a complaint under Section 33-A of Industrial disputes Act, 1947 before the Industrial Adjudicator before whom an earlier dispute for regularization vide ID No. 82/1995 was pending and claimed reinstatement with back wages.

(3.) THE Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court vide two separate awards, one dated 07. 06. 2004 and the second dated 08. 06. 2004 directed the petitioner to regularize the respondent in its service w. e. f. the date of his initial appointment i. e. 12. 10. 1984 and further directed the petitioner to reinstate him with full back wages.