GONDAL NAGARPALIKA Vs. VIJAYKUMAR MADHUBHAI PADHIYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common issue involved in the captioned writ petitions, the same are heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Present petitions are filed by the petitioner - Gondal Negarpalika under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Act") challenging the judgment and award passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rajkot (hereinafter be referred to as "the Labour Court") in Reference (LCR) Nos. 76 of 2011 & 77 of 2011 respectively, whereby, the learned Judge has partly allowed the Reference filed by the respective respondents and directed the petitioner - Nagarpalika to reinstate the workman with 20% backwages and continuity of service and also directed to pay sum of Rs.2,500.00 each as expenses to the respondent-workmen.

(3.) Brief facts of the case of the petitions are that the respondent - workmen were working, continuously with the petitioner as Valveman and drawing salary of Rs.1200.00 per month w.e.f. 1994 to 12/1/2000. It is contended that on 12/12/2000, the workman was terminated from the services without issuing notice or paying notice pay and, thereafter, though dispute was not resolved, the same was referred to the Labour Court by way of reference. The workmen have averred that the petitioner has committed breach of Sec. 25(F), (H) and (G) of the Industrial Disputes Act and also averred that the workmen had worked for more than 240 days. It is also contended that the petitioner has filed written statement at Exhibit 10 inter alia contending that the workmen were not permanent employees of the petitioner and their appointments were not made by following due procedure of law. The workmen filed applications for condonation of delay, which came to be allowed by the Labour Court without hearing the petitioner as the workman preferred References after 11 years from their termination. The Labour Court allowed the reference and directed the petitioner to reinstate the workmen with 20% back wages.