K L KONDAPPA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the award dated 3-11-1993 passed by the Labour Court in I.D.No. 176 of 1988 wherein the learned Judge while holding that Regulation 16 of the second respondent as not valid and legal, granted the relief of payment of Rs. 30,000/- in lieu of reinstatement.

(2.) The brief facts are that the petitioner was working under the second respondent. He applied for leave for some time and has extended the same from time to time. But the extension was not sanctioned by the second respondent. Therefore, it was held to be over-staying the sanctioned leave beyond 9 days. By invoking Regulation 16 of Service Regulations, the second respondent removed the petitioner from service holding that the petitioner lost the lien on his employment.

(3.) Subsequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this court which was allowed and against the same the second respondent filed a writ appeal on the ground that the petitioner was not a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. This court directed the petitioner to approach the Labour Court. Upon such direction, the petitioner approached the Labour Court. It was held by the Labour Court that by virtue of nature of his employment, he was a workman. This conclusion was arrived at after conducting thorough enquiry. As regards the nature of work of the petitioner that is not in dispute now.