DILIPBHAI V. BHAYANI Vs. CHIEF OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Special Civil Application takes exception to judgment and award dtd. 7/2/2012 passed in Reference (LCJ) No. 57 of 1991 by learned Labour Court, Junagadh, camp- Porbandar whereby the learned Labour Court has partly allowed the reference awarding a lumpsum compensation of Rs.50,000.00 to the petitioner herein for violation of provisions of Sec. 25(G) and (H) read with Rules 81 and 82 of the Industrial Disputes Act .

(2.) The brief facts leading to filing of the present Special Civil Application are as follows:-

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. P. H. Pathak appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was serving on a regular post with effect from 22/12/1988 with a remuneration of Rs.1500.00 per month and that the services of the petitioner was continuous, however, without any notice or notice pay or retrenchment compensation, the respondents illegally terminated the services of the petitioner on 1/3/1989. It was further submitted that since the learned Labour Court has come to the conclusion that there was no compliance of mandatory provisions of Sec. 25(G) and (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act before terminating the services of the petitioner, he was entitled to be reinstated in service instead of being granted lumpsum compensation as awarded by the learned Labour Court. It was further submitted that admittedly, the respondent has not produced any seniority-list nor even maintained the same before termination of the petitioner. It was further submitted that the respondent had committed a breach of Rule 81 read with Sec. 25(G) and (H). It was submitted that since it was brought on record that the work was available and was of permanent nature and in place of the petitioner, another employee had been employed, under such circumstances, the learned Labour Court ought to have awarded reinstatement with all consequential benefits to the petitioner. He would submit that the learned Labour Court has erred in not reinstating the petitioner and therefore, the said award is liable to be set aside and the petitioner be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits.