EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL DIVISION Vs. PRAKASH DEVIDAS KALSAIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether the retrenchment effected without complying with the procedure prescribed by Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act amounts to unfair labour practice within the meaning of item 1(f) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Unfair Labour Practices Act).

(2.) THE respondent was employed on daily wages of Rs. 8.10 as an assistant wireman in the electrical division of the Public Works and Health Department at Nagpur from September 19, 1980 to August 31, 1981. His services were dispensed with from August 31, 1981 in order to accommodate the candidates recommended by the employment exchange as required by rules. The respondent filed a complaint application under Section 28 of the Unfair Labour Practices Act read with item 1(a)(b) and (f) of Schedule IV, challenging the termination of his services on the ground that though he had completed 240 working days during one calendar year his services were terminated without one month's notice or pay in lieu of notice and without paying retrenchment compensation as required by Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, and that he was removed from service while his juniors were retained.

(3.) SHRI Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader, tried to contend that the respondent had not completed 240 working days in one calendar year before his services were terminated. It is difficult even to consider this submission, because it is a question of fact, the finding about which is concluded by the concurrent decisions of the two authorities.