NAGAR NIGAM, GHAZIABAD Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SRI J.A. Khan, learned Counsel has appeared through caveat for respondent No. 3 Gyan Chand. He has filed counter Affidavit. Let rejoinder affidavit be filed within three weeks.

(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against award dated 23.3.2009 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court (II), U.P. Ghaziabad in adjudication case No. 21 of 1998. The matter which was referred to the Labour Court was as to whether the action of petitioner -employer terminating the services of its workman respondent No. 3 w.e.f. 14,11.1996 was just and valid or not The case pf the workman was that he was appointed in January, 1988. Labour Court held that on the basis of short absence services of petitioner were wrongly terminated, The case of the employer was that petitioner was a daily wager. In that regard Labour Court held that as petitioner -workman had completed more than 240 days in a year hence termination without payment of retrenchment compensation as required by section 6 -N of U.P.I.D. Act was bad in law. Accordingly reinstatement with 50% back -wages was directed by the Labour Court. Supreme Court in various authorities including Jagbir Singh v. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board and another, 2009 (122) FLR 665 (SC), has held that if the only defect in the termination order is non -payment of retrenchment compensation and employer is Government or Governmental agency and no procedure before appointment was followed then instead of reistatement with backwages, the proper relief to be granted is of payment of consolidated/compensation.