SITARAM YADAV Vs. TUTON PHARMACEUTICALS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs.Sangeeta Pahwa, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dhaval Shah, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The petitioner workman, being partly aggrieved by the award dtd.19/1/1999 passed by the learned Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (LCA) No. 564 of 1985, is before this Court with submissions that the court below erred in directing that the petitioner should be reinstated in the services as a fresh appointee and further erred in not giving any benefits of back wages, continuity in service etc.

(3.) After making an inquiry, the employer found the present petitioner guilty of the charges and after providing further hearing, removed the employee from service. Being aggrieved by the said award of punishment, the workman had filed the reference. The learned court below, after recording the evidence and hearing the parties found that the Charge No.2 was not proved, but, without recording a single finding that the Charge No.1 was proved, observed that in view of the charge and evidence available on the records, the award of punishment of removal from service was not proper, therefore, interfered on the question of punishment and directed fresh appointment of the petitioner.