ANIL KUMAR SAXENA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE NAINITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri M.C. Kandpal, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.S. Chaudhary, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.K. Sharma, the learned counsel for the respondents -company.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as an Accounts Clerk in the year 1976 in the respondents sugar factory by an order of 1st October, 1978. His services were terminated, against which, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute and the award was given directing reinstatement with continuity of services. This award was challenged by the employers but during its pendency the petitioner was reinstated on 31st March, 1981 without prejudice to the rights of the employers. In 1986, one Sri C.P. Srivastava was appointed as an Accounts Clerk who was given promotion as an Assistant Accountant Grade -1 on 19th March, 1991. This became the genesis of the present dispute. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute which was eventually referred for adjudication to a Labour Court being Adjudication Case No. 9 of 1993. The terms of the reference order was: -

(3.) THE petitioner, being aggrieved by the order of the termination, filed the present writ petition before the Allahabad High Court questioning the validity and legality of the termination order dated 22.06.1993. Upon the creation of the High Court of Uttarakhand, the matter was transmitted to this Court.