SHAPUR GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. HARSUKHBHAI HIRABHAI FALDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this petition, the petitioner has challenged award dated 29.1.2009 passed by learned Labour Court, Junagadh, in Reference (LCJ) No.133 of 2001, whereby reference is partly allowed and the workman is ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service and 50% backwages and cost of Rs.1,000/- is also awarded.

(2.) It is contended by the petitioner that respondent was employed as a daily wager by Shapur Gram Panchayat subsequent to resolution and he has joined as daily wager with effect from 11.12.1984. It is contended that after 31.12.1999, the respondent has abandoned the service. He was served with notice dated 24.7.2000 by the then Administrator of Shapur Gram Panchayat, asking him to report for duty as he was unauthorizedly absent for more than six months. According to the petitioner, inspite of this, the respondent did not join the service and later on moved Assistant Labour Commissioner at Junagadh, alleging that he was unauthorizedly and illegally terminated from service by the Gram Panchayat and, therefore, a notice dated 23.1.2001 was issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Junagadh, for hearing on 7.2.2001. It is contended that the petitioner filed a detailed reply stating that the respondent herein had voluntarily left service and started business at Surat and there was no question of any unauthorized or illegal termination. It is also contended that visiting card of the respondent showing his address of business at Surat was also annexed with the same. It is further contended that thereafter the respondent filed reference (LCJ) No.133 of 2001 before Labour Court, Junagadh praying for reinstatement with continuity and full backwages. It is contended that by two replies dated 16.1.2002 and 17.9.2002, the petitioner has pointed out all these facts, however, no advocate was engaged by the petitioner and, thereafter, the Labour Court has delivered impugned award dated 29.1.2009 directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service without continuity and 50% backwages with effect from 31.12.1999.

(3.) It is contended that the labour Court has committed serious error of fact and law in granting award in favour of the respondent. According to the petitioner, the respondent has abandoned the service and has started business at Surat and there was no question of reinstatement. It is also contended that the Labour Court has not assigned any cogent reasons for awarding reinstatement with continuity and 50% backwages and there is no finding of violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. On all these grounds, it is prayed to set aside the impugned award passed by the Labour Court, Junagadh, by allowing present petition.