STATE OF U.P. Vs. GULREJ AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second round of litigation. The petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the award passed by the labour court directing reinstatement of the petitioner with 50 percent back wages.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the respondent workman alleged that he was appointed as an Engraver in the Government Press at Allahabad on 10th December, 1991 and continued to work till 1st of September, 2004. It was alleged that he worked for almost 13 years without any break in service and that he was arbitrarily removed without complying with the provisions of Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. The respondents, accordingly prayed that he was liable to be reinstated with continuity of service and with full back wages.

(3.) The petitioner in the written statement has specifically taken a stand that the post of Engraver became vacant and was never filled up and that the respondent workman in question was never employed either as a regular employee or on a muster roll or on daily wage basis and that the respondent workman was running a shop of engraving and was doing his private business and that in exigency of work, the petitioner gave him work orders, which he executed it at his shop. However for certain work, on account of security reasons, he was allowed to do the said work in the foundry located inside the Government Press. The petitioners further took a stand that the respondent workman was paid for the work order and that he was never paid wages as a regular employee.