STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BIHOLA RAVINDRASINH NAVUJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An award dated 26.08.2016 passed in Reference (T) Case No. 779 of 2014 by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad awarding reinstatement to respondent-workman with continuity of service and 20% back-wages is challenged in this petition.

(2.) According to the workman, he had worked with the petitioner-employer for the period between 01.05.2007 and 24.03.2014 continuously at the monthly wage of Rs. 4500/, whereas according to the petitioner employer he had worked from 01.01.2008 to October, 2014 on the need basis and he had stopped reporting for duty since October, 2014. It was the case of the employer that the workman was not appointed in accordance with the recruitment procedure and as such he was not in continuous service.

(3.) The Labour Court after perusing the documentary evidence adduced before recorded the factual finding that the workman was in continuous service and thus the defence of the employer that the workman had abandoned the job was not accepted in absence of the bona-fides of employer calling upon the workman to resume duty in writing. Additionally, what is noticed from the record is that workman immediately on termination made a representation as also issued notice to the petitioner-employer on 07.08.2014. This conduct of the workman betrayed the say of the employer that he had abandoned the work. Thus, the factual finding of the Labour Court that the workman had not abandoned the job cannot be interfered with.