(1.) HEARD Sri Subhash Upadhyaya, the learned Brief Holder for the Petitioner and Sri Pankaj Miglani, the learned Counsel for the workman/Respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE State (Petitioners) has assailed the validity and legality of the award dated 31.10.2000 passed by the labour court in Adjudication case No. 240 of 1999 whereby the labour court directed the reinstatement of the workman without back wages but awarded a compensation of Rs. 10,000/ - and Rs. 2,000/ - as cost.
(3.) THE Petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present writ petition. The learned Brief Holder for the Petitioner submitted that old and stale dispute should not be referred and that there was delay of more than 13 years, consequently, no industrial dispute existed nor the workman was entitled for any relief. The learned Brief Holder for the Petitioner further submitted that the finding of the labour court that the workman had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year was based on surmises and conjectures and consequently, the said finding was perverse. The learned Brief Holder for the Petitioner further submitted that the muster roll records are maintained for a period of ten years and as per their manual instructions the records were weeded out.