NITIN RATILAL BHATT Vs. DY. CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waves service of rule on behalf of respondents.

(2.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed challenging the award of the Labour Court, Junagadh in LCJ No.02 of 2011.

(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has made two fold prayers while challenging the award of the Labour Court. Firstly, claiming reinstatement with full back wages and in alternative lump-sum compensation of Rs.5.00Lakhs. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had started working as a Computer Operator on daily wage basis with the respondent-Forest Department in the year 1998 and had continued till 1/1/2006 and without any written notice or following the provision of Industrial Dispute and particularly Sec. 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 (for short "the Act"), petitioner's services were terminated. It is submitted that at the relevant time the petitioner was getting monthly wages of Rs.2100.00. Learned advocate for the petitioner has taken this Court to the finding of the Labour Court which has accepted the fact that the petitioner has worked from 1998 to 2006 and in most of the years, had completed 240 days and therefore, the petitioner was entitled to a notice as provided under Sec. 25B of the Act before being terminated. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that through there was nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner had stopped working with the Forest Department and had joined ICICI Bank, the Labour Court has proceeded on presumption of petitioner having worked with ICICI Bank as the petitioner is not denied. It is submitted that it was for the respondents to establish on record their contention of the petitioner working with another institution only thereafter, the burden to shift on the petitioner.