MANAGER GUJCOMASOL PESTICIDES DEPTT Vs. KIRITKUMAR BABULAL PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since more or less common issue is involved in all these petitions and since they are heard together, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) Special Civil Application No.1546 of 2006 is filed by a Manager, Gujcomasol Pesticides Department challenging the award passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court No. 6 at Ahmedabad on 30.5.2005 in Reference (LCA) No.247 of 2001. This reference is in relation to a workman, namely, Kiritkumar Babulal Patel, respondent No.1 herein. The respondent filed his statement of claim, inter alia, contending that he was rendering the services with the petitioner since 1.7.1998 and he was getting monthly salary of Rs.2,180/ -. His services were terminated with effect from 31.8.2000 without any fault and without giving him notice or notice pay and the same was violative of Section 25F, G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act. The case of the petitioner was that at the time of termination of service of the respondent on 29.8.2000 all the dues as required under Section 25F were paid to the workmen. The Labour Court has passed an award of reinstatement with continuity of service to his original post and 40% back wages.

(3.) Special Civil Application No.16855 of 2007 is filed by Liason Officer, Gujarat State Cooperative Marketing Federation Ltd., challenging the award passed by the Labour Court, Surendranagar on 28.5.2007 in Reference (LCA) No.13 of 2001. This reference is in relation to Shri Atulkumar Bachubhai Parmar, respondent herein. In his statement of claim the respondent, inter alia, contended that initially his services were terminated on 30.10.1996 but on intervention of the Conciliation Officer he was reinstated in the service. However, by an order dated 31.8.2000 his services were again terminated without following due process of law and not even disclosing that he was paid retrenchment compensation and other dues. In its written statement, the petitioner contended that the respondent's services were terminated pursuant to the order passed by this Court and on vacation of the interim order passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court at Ahmedabad in Complaint No.4 of 2000. It was further contended that the termination order dated 29.8.2000 was not in challenge and, therefore, the reference was not tenable. The learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, at Surendranagar allowed the reference vide his award and order dated 28.5.2007 and directed to reinstate the respondent on his original post without backwages.