(1.) Rule. Mr. Devang Dave, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of Rule on behalf of respondents. By consent Rule is fixed forthwith. The petitioner, who happened to be a second party workman in the Demand Reference Case No. 11 of 2003 in the Court of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Junagadh, has approached this court by way of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the award and judgment passed on 17.10.2014, whereunder the Demand Reference Case was rejected by the Court for the reasons stated thereunder.
(2.) The facts in brief, as could be culled out from the memo of petition, deserves to be set out, are as under:
(3.) The learned advocate for the petitioner workman contended that the Labour Court has absolutely misdirected itself while framing points as there was no scope for ignoring the continuous service served by the workman which was infact hit by the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act.