(1.) This petition under Article 226 227 of the Constitution of India is filed against judgment and award dtd. 3/4/2017 passed by the Labour Court, Junagadh in Reference (T) No.46 of 2010, by which case of the petitioner for reinstatement with full back wages came to be rejected. The main prayer is to quash and set aside the said award. In the alternative, it is prayed that a lump sum compensation granted by the Labour Court be enhanced to Rs.2,00,000.00.
(2.) When called out, learned Advocate for the petitioner is absent. Considering the nature of matter and being adjourned from time to time, is taken up for hearing with the assistance of learned Advocate Ms.Acharya appearing for respondent No.1.
(3.) In the petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had joined services as "safai kamdar" peon. His services were terminated on 10/4/2009 without giving notice, notice pay or retrenchment compensation. It is the case in the pleadings that the Labour Court has considered the judgment of the apex Court in case of BSNL Vs. Bhurumal. In this judgment, the Apex Court also considered another judgment of the Apex Court in case of Jagbir Singh Vs. Haryana State Agr. Marketing Board, reported in 2009 (4) LLJ (SC), 336, wherein the Apex Court observed in para-16 that while awarding compensation, the host of factors like manner and method of appointment, nature of employment and length of service are relevant and each case will depend upon its own facts and circumstances. The Apex Court observed that as the total length of service rendered was short and intermittent from September 1, 1995 to July 18, 1996, granted compensation of Rs.50,000.00 in lieu of reinstatement. In the present case, the petitioner worked for almost 4 years and the Labour Court found that the employer did not comply with the statutory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. The amount of compensation was also not satisfactory. Therefore, in the alternative of reinstatement, the amount may be enhanced.