SECRETARY KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a thoroughly ill advised and misconceived writ petition. A reference was made by order No. 13597 "whether the workman Respondent Raj Kumar Upadhyay was validly terminated or not?" which was registered as Adjudication Case No. 382 of 2003. The employer raised preliminary objection about validity of reference pursuant whereto a preliminary issue was framed as under:

(2.) This issue has been answered by Labor Court against the employer saying that the employer could not show mala fide. Merely because workman has challenged his termination in Writ Petition No. 13607 of 1998, which has been dismissed as not pressed or that he filed another writ petition No. 6991 (S/S) of 2000 wherein a direction was issued that the workman may be considered in the light of the directions issued in the judgment dated 11.8.2000 passed in Writ petition No. 1346 (S/S) of 2000 (Mukesh Kumar v. U.P. Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad and Ors.) vide judgment dated 15.12.2000 but ultimately both the judgments of Lucknow Bench were set aside in State of U.P. v. Neeraj Awasthi, 2006 1 SCC 667, it would not make the reference mala fide.

(3.) Sri B.D. Mandhyan, Sr. Advocate, learned Counsel for the Petitioner could not point out before this Court as to how mere fact that workman filed two writ petitions before the Court, in which issue referred for adjudication was not at all decided, would result in making reference mala fide.