GORDHANBHAI NANJIBHAI Vs. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the year would suggest, the matter is pending for more than eight years, without having taken any cognizance by this Court. In the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned order dtd. 7/9/2010 passed by the Labour Court, Surendranagar in Reference (LCS) No.65 of 2003, wherein and whereby, the Labour Court has directed the reinstatement of the petitioner in service with full back wages vide order dtd. 23/1/2007. The said award was ex-parte and was challenged before this Court by filing Special Civil Application No.8278 of 2008 and allied matters. This Court vide order dtd. 8/4/2009, remanded the matter to the Labour Court and thereafter, the Labour Court vide impugned order dtd. 7/9/2010 dismissed the reference of the petitioners. The Labour Court, Surendranagar, after examining the evidence on record, has rejected the reference, which is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr.Virvadiya, appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned award is required to be quashed and set aside, since the Labour Court has not appreciated that the petitioners had worked for 240 days and there is also a violation of Sec. 25F, G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1847 (I.D. Act ). Thus, he has submitted that the award may be set aside.

(3.) On a specific query raised by this Court with regard to the documentary evidence produced before the Labour Court, suggesting the completion of 240 days by the petitioner in preceding year before the termination, learned advocate Mr.Virvadiya, has admitted that in fact, no material was produced by the petitioner workmen suggesting that he had completed 240 days.