STATE OF U P Vs. HIND MAJDOOR SABHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Standing Counsel has pressed this writ petition only in so far as the relief of reinstatement has been granted by. Labour Court with 50% back wages and contended that even if the Labour Court was right in holding that workman having completed 240 days in each year, has worked for about four years from 1988 to 1992, was entitled for protection of Section 6N of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") that would not automatically result in granting relief of reinstatement for the reason that workman was a daily wager, never recruited in accordance with provisions prescribed in law consistent with Article 16 of the Constitution, hence having worked for only four years could not have been allowed reinstatement with 50% back wages for a period of almost 12 years.

(2.) The workman was disengaged on 1.9.1992 and award was delivered on 4.9.2003 published on 26.4.2004 in Adjudication Case No. 484 of 1994. It is said that the award to this extent is contrary to law laid down by this Court as well as Apex Court in catena of decisions.

(3.) Sri Siddharth, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent-workman submitted that once it is shown that workman was retrenched under Section 6N of the Act the relief of reinstatement was obligatory which the Labour Court has granted and, therefore, no interference is called for. He placed reliance on Apex Court's decision in R.M. Yellatti v. The Assistant Executive Engineer, 2006 1 UPLBEC 213 and a single Judge decision of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7133 of 1995, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, U.P. Meerut and Anr. v. The Prescribed Authority, Industrial Tribunal (V), U.P. Meerut and Anr., 2002 3 ESC 32. He further contended that Industrial Disputes Act does not make any difference between daily wager, casual, temporary, permanent etc. It talks of only a workman and, therefore, if a workman has wrongly been retrenched he is entitled for protection under Section 6N of the Act and whenever such provision is violated the aggrieved workman must be given the relief of reinstatement and back wages.