SHEO MURAT Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT GORAKHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 9.7.1980, a reference was made by the State of U.P. to Labour Court, Gorakhpur, under Section 4(k) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as to whether termination of services of workman w.e.f. 18.9.1978 is valid or not, which has been answered against the workman, vide award dated 16.11.1984, which is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) PURSUANT to reference, a written statement was filed by the workman stating that he was working as Peon since August, 1977, and has continued as such till 18.9.1978. It was alleged that various unfair labour practices were being resorted to by the employer, inasmuch as Principal of the institution, wherein he was working, used to take domestic work from him, and he was also required to work as Chawkidar. Grievance of the workman was that without paying any retrenchment compensation, under Section 6 -N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Principal all of a sudden stopped taking work from him w.e.f. 18.9.1978. It was averred that letters were sent to the educational authorities, and thereafter, conciliation proceedings were initiated on 30th July, 1979. Upon failure of conciliation, reinstatement alongwith back wages was claimed by workman from the employer, before the Labour Court.

(3.) PRINCIPAL of the Degree College, who was the employer herein, filed a written statement categorically admitting engagement of workman, though on temporary basis, and it was alleged that the workman was found removing important documents, whereafter he himself abandoned his work, and despite notices sent to him on 4.10.1978, 9.10.1978 and 18.10.1978, he did not report for joining. It was then submitted that considering the nature of engagement, he was not entitled to any relief. Employer further alleged that the workman had not completed 240 days of continuous working, and the provision of Section 6 -N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was not attracted. Various other pleas including loss of confidence etc. were set up. It was also stated that employer was not surviving an industry, and no industrial dispute came into existence.