SANJAYKUMAR KALUBHAI CHAUHAN Vs. PRINCIPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned award dated 11.08.2011 passed by the Labour Court, Godhra in Reference (L.C.G.) No. 89 of 2004, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the following prayers:-

(2.) Brief facts of the present case is that the petitioner was serving as Hamal in the respondent - School since last three years prior to the date of his termination and he was being paid a salary of Rs.750/- per month. According to the petitioner, on 16.12.2003, the respondent has illegally terminated his service. Therefore, the petitioner has raised industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court being Reference (L.C.G.) No.89 of 2004, wherein, the respondent has contended that the respondent has not covered under the definition of the "industry" and the petitioner was working on fixed salary and fixed time basis and because of the irregularities, the respondent has terminated the petitioner from the service. It is contended by the respondent that he was serving as Hamal on fixed time basis and being paid salary of Rs.750/- per month.

(3.) After considering the evidence on record and submissions of both the sides, ultimately, the Labour Court has rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the respondent is not "Industry" and therefore, no provisions of the I.D. Act needs to be followed and on the ground that the workman was working on fixed time period.