STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. UDESINH BHIMSINH ZALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned award dated 27.05.2006 passed by the Labour Court Rajkot in Reference [LCR] No. 336 of 2006, whereby the Labour Court has directed the petitioners to reinstate the respondent workman on his original post with continuity of service without back wages.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the respondent workman was working as Watchman with the petitioner since 1989 and was drawing salary of Rs.900/- per month. The services of the respondent workman came to be terminated vide oral order dated 23.09.1998. Against the said order, the respondent workman raised a dispute which was ultimately referred to the Labour Court for adjudication being Reference [LCR] No. 336 of 2006. Before the Labour Court both the parties adduced evidence and after appreciating the material produced before it, the Labour Court allowed the reference with the aforesaid directions. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that the respondent workman himself stopped attending the work and his services were not terminated and therefore the judgment and award is illegal and unjust. On perusal of the record it transpires that the Labour Court has recorded the finding that the respondent workman has worked for more than 240 days in a year and his services were terminated without any notice nor retrenchment compensation. In view of these findings there is violation of provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned AGP appearing for the petitioner is not able to point out anything contrary from the record that the finding of the Labour Court in this regard is perverse. Therefore, I am of the view that the Labour Court has rightly passed the award of reinstatement with continuity of service.