(1.) Heard Mr. Chauhan, learned advocate for the petitioner, and Mr. Joshi, learned advocate for the respondent.
(2.) The petitioner has brought under challenge an award dated 3.11.2004 passed by learned Labour Court, Jamnagar in complaint (IT) No. 3 of 1996 whereby the learned Labour Court held that the petitioner university terminated the service of the respondent in violation of provision under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]. The learned Labour Court directed the petitioner university to reinstate the respondent and to pay 100% backwages. The petitioner university is aggrieved by the said award and direction. Hence, this petition.
(3.) So far as factual background is concerned, it has emerged from the record and from the submission by learned counsel for the contesting parties that present respondent, who was working as daily wager in the capacity of Field Labour invoked provision under Section 33 of the Act on the allegation that the petitioner university, by way of victimization, involved him in false case of alleged theft and forcibly extracted his signature on blank paper which was subsequently used as his resignation and thereby, illegally and arbitrarily terminated his service w.e.f. 10.1995. The respondent workman also alleged that he issued notice and demanded that he should be reinstated, however, any response from the university was not received and that therefore, he was constrained to file the complaint by invoking Section 33 of the Act in view of the fact that at the relevant time reference of general demand seeking regularization of the workman engaged on daily wage basis was pending. The said complaint was registered as complaint No. 3 of 1996 in the learned Labour Court at Jamnagar.