RAJKOT DIST PANCHAYAT Vs. NARSINHBHAI SOMABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Advocate, Mr.Premal R. Joshi, appearing on behalf of petitioners.

(2.) In the present petition, petitioner - RAJKOT DIST. PANCHAYAT has challenged the award passed by Labour Court, Rajkot in Reference No.564 of 1989 dated 31st March,2006. The Labour Court has granted reinstatement with continuity of service without back wages of interim period.

(3.) Learned Advocate, Mr.Joshi, submitted that Labour Court has committed gross error in granting reinstatement to the workman. He also submitted that workman has abandoned the work which does not amount to retrenchment. He also submitted that Labour Court has committed an error in coming to conclusion that Panchayat has to call the workman when he abandoned the work. He further submitted that he was not a regular employee but daily wager and not appointed by the regular process of recruitment Rules and, therefore, he is not entitled the benefits of Section 25F of the I.D.Act,1947. He also submitted that workman had not completed 240 days continuous service and no such evidence has been produced on record by the workman. Therefore, the Labour Court has committed an error in believing the evidence of the workman. Except that, no other submissions made by learned Advocate, Mr.Joshi.