STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMESHCHANDRA CHAGANBHAI MOCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Shri H.C.Buch, learned advocate waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent workman. With the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner â ⠢⠬⠢ ¢â ¬ â ¢ â ¢ ¢â ¬ … ¢â ¬ â ¬ State of Gujarat has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and award passed by the Labour Court, Bharuch dated 29th June, 2004 in Reference (LCB)) No.107 of 1999 (Old No.613 of 1987) in partly allowing the same and directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent workman with 15 % backwages and with continuity of service.

(3.) The respondent workman raised the Industrial dispute challenging his alleged termination with effect from 2nd July, 1985 which was referred to the Labour Court, Bharuch for its adjudication being Reference (LCB) No.107 of 1999. It was contended on behalf of the respondent workman that he has worked for more than five years and that his services came to be terminated orally with effect from 2nd July, 1985 in breach of Section-25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and therefore, it was requested to direct the petitioner to reinstate him with full backwages. It appears from the record that the said reference was resisted by the petitioner and the application was submitted raising the preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the reference contending interalia that the petitioner is not an "industry" within the definitions and the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. It appears that the petitioner did not file any written statement and / or reply to the Statement of Claim. Considering the judgment of this Court, the Labour Court held that the petitioner is an industry within the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and held that service of the respondent workman came to be terminated without giving any notice, notice pay and / or retrenchment compensation and therefore, there is breach of Section-25-F of the I.D.Act and therefore, by judgment and award dated 29th June, 2004 directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent workman with 15 % backwages and continuity of service. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award passed by the Labour Court, Bharuch dated 29th June, 2004 passed in Reference (LCB) No.107 of 1999 the petitioner has preferred the present special civil application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.