VAL COLOUR ARTS Vs. SANDESH RAMESH BHOSLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner (employer) invokes Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the following:

(2.) By the aforesaid two orders (hereafter referred to as 'the impugned orders') the employer has been directed to reinstate the respondent (employee) with continuity of services from 9 April 2003 and back-wages to the extent of fifty percent. The impugned orders hold and declare that the employer has engaged in unfair labour practices under Items (a), (b), (d), (f) and (g) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 ('said Act').

(3.) The case of the respondent employee is that he was employed by the employer, w.e.f. 12 June 1999 under the designation 'site supervisor' on a monthly salary of Rs.5,000/-. Despite completion of blemish-less service of around four years, the employer, without assigning any reasons, orally terminated the services of the employee w.e.f. 9 April 2003. This, according to the employee constitutes unfair labour practice in terms of Items 1(a), (b), (d), (f) and (g) of Schedule IV to the said Act.