RAJENDRA M BHATT Vs. DENNIS CHEM LABORATORY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr.P.H. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Uday Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The petitioner workman, being aggrieved by the award dtd.20/5/1999 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kalal in Reference (LCK) No.530 of 1987 (Old No.530 of 1987), is before this Court with a complaint that the findings recorded by the Labour Court that the petitioner had abandoned the work, are contrary to records. According to him, the management had filed an application-cum-note before the court below that they were ready and willing to re-employ the petitioner and in response to that offer, the petitioner went to the department, but he was not reemployed, therefore, the petitioner had issued a notice to the respondent on 21/11/1997 and under the circumstances, the court below could not justifiably hold that the petitioner has not proved his will to work.

(3.) Mr.Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent establishment on the other hand, submits that the petitioner made a complaint that he was orally retrenched / removed from service on 16/8/1986, but he did not file a claim petition upto the year 1990, nor the petitioner could prove that after 16/8/1986, he ever went to the work place nor lead any evidence to prove the contents of Exh.21/1 notice dtd.21/11/1997, has been brought on record.