DHANNU BHAGU RATHOD Vs. SARPANCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.

(2.) By this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the judgment and order dtd. 9/10/2018 delivered by the Industrial Court, Jalna, vide which, Complaint (ULP) No.298/2016 filed by the petitioner under Item 9 of the Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971, seeking implementation of the award delivered by the Labour Court in the reference case has been held to be untenable on the ground of bar of Sec. 59.

(3.) The petitioner had approached the Labour Court in Reference (IDA) No.2/2015 for challenging his termination. By the judgment and award dtd. 11/2/2016, the reference was answered in the affirmative and the petitioner was granted reinstatement with continuity and 50% back wages. As the award was not implemented, the petitioner approached the Industrial Court under Item 9 of the Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 alleging that failure on the part of the employer in implementing the settlement, agreement or award, would amount to unfair labour practice. The Industrial Court has concluded that as the petitioner had initially approached the Labour Court for challenging his termination, he could invoke the jurisdiction under Sec. 11(9) and (10) or under Sec. 29 of the I.D.Act, 1957.