STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. DNYANESHWAR RAKMAJI AHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenges the Award dt. 4-2-1995 passed by the II Labour Court at Ahmednagar in Reference IDA No. 60/1992, by which the petitioner Department of the Maharashtra State has been directed to reinstate respondent employee, with continuity in service and backwages w. e. f. 14-6-1990.

(2.) THE respondent was appointed on daily wages as Unskilled labour in Kukadi Irrigation Project, Division No. 2, Narayangaon w. e. f. 22-5-1979 and he continued to be employees as such till 24-3-1985 and thereafter, he did not report for duty. On or about 16-4-1990, the respondent, for the first time, made an application for re-employment and there was no response. By his letter dt. 25-6-1990, he was informed by the Executive Engineer, Kukadi Irrigation Project, Division No. 2, Narayangaon, that as there was no work available in the said Project, he could not be re-employed. The respondent, thereafter, submitted a Notice of Demand dt. 3-9-1990, addressed to the Superintending Engineer as well as Executive Engineer and, for the first time, he alleged that he was illegally removed from service w. e. f. 1-6-1985 and that the said oral removal from service was illegal. The respondent, therefore, claimed for reinstatement with continuity in service and backwages w. e. f. 1-6-1985. As there was no reply to this Notice of Demand, he approached the Conciliation Officer, under section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for reinstatement with continuity in service and backwages till 17-9-1990. By letter dt. 10-7-1991, addressed by the Executive Engineer, Kukadi Project, Division No. 6, Narayangaon, it was informed to the Conciliation Officer and Assistant Commissioner for Labour, Ahmednagar, that the respondent was employed as an Unskilled Dailywage Labour under Division No. 2 w. e. f. 22-5-1979 till 24-3-1985 and thereafter, he did not report for duty. It was further informed that on 16-4-1990 the respondent had submitted an application for re-employment and the same was replied to by letter dt. 25-6-1990. The petitioners also informed the Conciliation Officer that the respondent did not raise any grievance for the alleged illegal termination from the service for more than five years and there was no case for reinstatement in service, as demanded by the respondent. Notwithstanding the reply filed by the petitioners before the Conciliation Officer, it appears that the demand raised by the respondent came to be referred for adjudication by the Labour Court, Ahmednagar, sometime in the year 1992 and the Reference was registered as Reference (IDA) No. 60/1992.

(3.) BEFORE the Labour Court, the respondent contended that he had completed about six years of service in Kukadi Irrigation Project, Division No. 2, Narayangaon, as Unskilled Labour on daily wages and he was illegally terminated on 31-5-1985. The respondent, therefore, claimed that the alleged termination was illegal as there was no Notice, no Notice pay was given and no compensation was paid to him, even though he had completed more than 240 days of service, during the preceding twelve months, before the date of alleged illegal termination. The petitioner opposed the demand by filing a written statement and stated that it was not a case of termination, but the respondent himself did not turn at any time after 25-3-1985 for work and he kept mum for about five years. It was further submitted that as there was no case of termination, at the hands of petitioners, the question of illegal termination did not arise either with or without notice and payment of compensation. The petitioners seem to have also relied upon a chart of statement showing details of employment of respondent during the period from 22-3-1979 to 25-3-1985 and the petitioners finally had prayed that as there was no case of alleged termination, leave alone retrenchment, the reference was devoid of merits and same ought to be rejected on that ground alone. However, the Labour Court, Ahmednagar, on hearing both the parties and on perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, referred to hereinabove, directed to reinstate the respondent with continuity in service and full backwages w. e. f. 14-6-1990.