TALUKA DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Vs. RAJNIKANT K PANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Mr.G.K. Rathod, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent. On the facts and in the circumstance of the case and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the matter is being heard and finally decided, today.

(2.) BY way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and award dated 28.02.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Nadiad in Reference (L.C.N.) No.181 of 1994, whereby the Labour Court partly-allowed the said Reference and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent without any back-wages.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the respondent was daily wager and he had not even completed 240 days' work, still the Labour Court passed the order of reinstatement. The petitioner-Panchayat does not fall within the definition of an "industry". The petitioner-Panchayat is not governed by Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and further the respondent has approached the Labour Court after period of seven years. There is no sanction cadre post of a typist in Taluka Panchayat and therefore, there is no question of reinstatement. The work done by the respondent was of a temporary nature and not permanent. The respondent is bound by the terms and conditions of the order of appointment. Therefore, the present petition is required to be allowed.