JAYANTIBHAI MADHAVDAS DEVMORARI Vs. ARVIND INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions arise out of an award dated 4. 10. 99 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot in Reference (LCR) No. 437/87. The reference was made at the instance of the workman, petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 7780 of 2000 who had challenged his termination by the employer. The Labour Court allowed the reference in part and directed reinstatement of the workman with 25% backwages. The employer as well as the workman have both challenged the same award.

(2.) UPON perusal of the material on record, I find that the workman was engaged by the employer from 1. 2. 83 as a drill-man. He complained of illegal termination on 1. 11. 86. Defence of the employer, however, was that the workman had voluntarily stopped reporting for duty. It may be noted that for the alleged termination on 1. 11. 86, the workman had issued a notice on 12. 11. 86 shortly after the termination. On the basis of the evidence, the Labour Court accepted that the workman was terminated. Before the Labour Court, the employer showed willingness to reinstate the workman in service, the Labour Court observed that before the Labour Commissioner, no such stand appears to have been taken. On that basis, the Labour Court was pleased to set aside the termination. Regarding backwages, the Labour Court found that the workman was engaged intermittently. He was therefore granted only 25% backwages. I do not find that the Labour Court committed any illegality or jurisdictional error calling for interference under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution. Findings of the Labour Court are based on evidence on record. Such factual findings do not call for interference. Regarding backwages also, the Labour Court has passed order balancing the interest of both sides. Both the petitions are therefore dismissed. Rule is discharged. Civil Application is also disposed of.