MANIKCHAND G LULLA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner impugns the award passed by the Labour Court, Amravati on 14.1.2003 answering the reference in the affirmative and holding that the respondent no.3 was entitled to reinstatement in service with 50% of back wages.

(2.) The respondent no.3 had filed a statement of claim before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Amravati. It was the case of the respondent no.3 that he was working with the petitioner as a Salesman since 1980 on monthly salary of Rs.1250/. According to the respondent no.3, he was not paid the wages admissible to him. The respondent no.3 was on leave for a period of 45 days with due permission of the petitioner, and when he went to join his duties in the shop on 1.5.1996, the petitioner did not permit him to join the duties. The respondent no.3 claimed that, time and again he approached the petitioner with a request to resume the duty, but he was not allowed to join the duty. It was pleaded by the respondent no.3 that his juniors were retained in service while he was removed and therefore, he sought for his reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.

(3.) The petitioner filed written statement and denied the claim of the respondent no.3. It was denied that the respondent no.3 proceeded on leave for a period of 45 days. It was the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.3 had without any intimation left the services of the petitioner by remaining absent till 30.3.1996. It was the case of the petitioner that, it was not a case of termination of service, but was a case of relinquishment of service. The Labour Court on an appreciation of evidence on record held that the petitioner failed to prove that the respondent no.3 had abandoned his services and was therefore, liable to reinstate the respondent no.3 in service with continuity of service and 50% back wages. The order dated 14.1.2003 is impugned in the instant writ petition.