HASMAT ALI Vs. LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner workman challenges an award dated 10-8-1994 made by the Labour Court-I, U. P., Ghaziabad in Adjudication Case No, 431 of 1993 whereby it held the termination of his services to be invalid being in violation of Section 16-N of the Industrial Disputes Act and ordered his reinstatement but without back wages. The Labour Court has directed that for the period the workman remained absent from duty he be treated to be on leave for the period leave is due to him and for the rest he be treated as on leave without pay. It is this part of the award that is challenged by the workman in this petition.

(2.) I have heard Sri K. P. Agarwal, Senior Advocate, counsel for the petitioner on admission.

(3.) The employer respondent is M/s. Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Rishikesh, a Government of India undertaking. The petitioner Hashmat Ali was employed as a foreman. He was granted leave for the period 20-5-1983 to 30-6-1983 for the purpose inter alia of a Haj Pilgrimage to Arabia. He did not report for duty en the expiration of leave. Instead he sought extensions upto 31-7-1983, then upto 31-10-1983 and then upto 30-11-1983. The extensions were not granted and by letter dated 2-12-1983 the management terminated his services with effect from 30-6-1983. On 9-12-1987 he moved an application before the Conciliation Officer making a grievance thereof but he did not pursue the same and application was dismissed ex parte. He then got the alleged industrial dispute referred to the Labour Court. The reference made by order dated 23-5-1990 resulting in the aforesaid award.