SHAILESHBHAI MOHANBHAI Vs. BOTAD NAGAR PALIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned advocate Shri Mishra for the petitioner. Rule. Mrs. Kiran P. Joshi, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule for the respondent. With the consent of the advocates for the parties, rule is fixed forthwith.

(2.) THE petitioner second party workman in Reference (IT) No. 84 of 1998 in the Court of Ld. Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar, has approached this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order in award passed by the Tribunal, rejecting the reference on 27/10/2010.

(3.) THE workman had in fact pressed into service the fatum with regard to mode of employment and set-up of sanctioned post etc. THE respondent contended that the workman was employed on temporary basis and if appointment of a person in permanent nature is to be made then it is to be made strictly in accordance with relevant factors narrated in the reply. THE concerned Tribunal after setting out various decisions and elaborate extraction there from came to the conclusion that the reference deserved to be rejected, accordingly rejected it vide order dated 27/10/2010.