RANGE FOREST OFFICER Vs. MAMDBHAI SAINABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though served, none appears for the respondent. 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned award dated 26.11.2007 passed by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar, in Reference No. 101/1990, whereby the Labour Court has directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service with 20% back wages.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the respondent workman was working in Nursery Department as Watchman, since 1981 on daily wage basis. The services of the respondent came to be orally terminated w.e.f. 28.04.1989. Being aggrieved by the same, the respondent raised a dispute, which was ultimately referred to the Labour Court for adjudication being Reference No. 101 of 1990. Before the Labour Court, both the parties adduced evidence and after appreciating the material produced before it, the Labour Court partly allowed the reference with the aforesaid directions. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 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 eight years 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.