CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION Vs. LABOUR COURT AT GHAZIABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This writ petition has been filed for setting aside the award dated 22.12.1995, published on 27.9.1997 in Adjudication Case No. 253 of 1987 and further prayer is for commanding the labour court to treat the termination of the services of the 12 workmen w.e.f. 12.3.1987 and to rehear the matter of dispute and decide the same on the basis of the dismissal having taken place on 12.3.1987. The writ petition has been filed on behalf of one Sri Virendra Garg, Member, Executive Committee of the Chemical Works Union, 231, Lal Jhanda Bhawan, Ambedkar Road, Ghaziabad, against the award dated 22.12.1995 by which the claim of the workmen has not been accepted by the labour court.

(2.) THE facts arising out of the writ petition are that the workmen who are working under respondent No. 2, there was some dispute and they went on strike and then they have stated that they wanted to join from 12.11.1987 but the employer has not permitted them to join the duties as such the dispute arose. THE matter was referred to the State Government and the State Government has referred the dispute to the labour court for adjudication. THE reference is being reproduced below :/ ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... THE labour court has rejected the claim of the petitioner only on the ground that the date which has been mentioned by the petitioner as 12.3.1987, there was no termination order and as the respondent has come with a case that the services of these workmen have been terminated on 9.4.1987 and there is no reference regarding consideration of the order dated 9.4.1987, therefore, the labour court will not adjudicate the matter beyond the reference and had dismissed the claim of the petitioner.

(3.) FROM the evidence it is also clear that the workmen gave a notice on 11.3.1987. The same was given by the Union but there is no signature of the workman and no information to this effect that respondent No. 2 has not permitted to work these workmen has been given to the labour court Commissioner. It has also come in the statement that no complaint to the City Magistrate has been made as the petitioners have failed to prove that they tried to join on 12.3.1987. On the other hand, a finding to this effect has been recorded by the labour court that respondent No. 2 has sent a registered notice on 9.9.1987 and the same has been proved by producing the receipts and by oral evidence and as such, has recorded a finding that there was no dispute on 12.3.1987, therefore, the reference is bad.