ANIRUDDHSINH VAJUBHA ZALA Vs. SARPANCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, order and/or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned judgement and award dated 23/08/2002 passed by the Labour Court, Surendranagar in Reference (LCS) No.105/1993, by which, the Labour Court, Surendranagar has dismissed the said Reference and rejected the prayer of the petitioners to reinstate them in service. However, directed the respondent herein to pay lumpsum compensation of Rs.10,000/ - to each of the workmen.

(2.) MR .Kalpesh Shastri, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that there was specific finding given by the Labour Court that termination/ retrenchment is found to be in breach of Section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act and Labour Court ought to have passed an order of reinstatement. By making above submission, it is requested to allow the present petition.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that it is not in dispute that appointment of the petitioners as daily wagers, without following any due procedure of law and appointment was not on sanctioned vacant post. It appears that Labour Court held that there was a breach of Section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act as at the time of releasing the petitioners retrenchment compensation was not paid. Therefore, question posed for consideration of this Court is as to whether in such facts and circumstances of the case, Labour Court is justified in denying order of reinstatement and paying lumpsum compensation to the petitioners ?