MUNNA Vs. P.O. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Petitioner. No one appears for the Respondents - U.P. Rajya Vidyut Parishad and its authorities.

(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against award dated 29.5.1993 given by Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal (I), U.P., Allahabad in adjudication case No. 70 of 1988. The matter which was referred to the Labour court was as to whether action of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - employer of not giving the pay and designation of Foreman to the Petitioner -workman who was driver - cum -mechanic was just and valid or not. The case of the Petitioner was that he was appointed as driver -cum -mechanic on 16.1.1961 and after the retirement of Shri K.B. Lal, Foreman - workshop -superintendent he was required to perform his (K.B. Lal's) duties. Earlier a judgment was passed by this Court in writ petition No. 21542 of 1988 on 18.1.1989 (Annexure -10). The writ petition was directed against an order of the tribunal refusing to consolidate the two cases, one in respect of the Petitioner and the other in respect of B.K. Singh (Adjudication case No. 6 of 1988). However, it was clarified that no finding recorded by the tribunal in other adjudication case i.e. 6 of 1988 will have any bearing upon the adjudication case in question. In the impugned award the said finding has been quoted.

(3.) I do not find least error in the impugned award. I fully agree with the reason given by the Presiding officer of the Industrial tribunal. Petitioner did not possess necessary educational qualification which are essential for the post of Foreman which is promotional post. Shri B.K. Singh was promoted after qualifying the written test and interview and he also possessed necessary qualifications.