RAVINDRA SHOBHAWAT Vs. SECRETARY KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern disposal of Writ petition No.157/2008 (s), Writ Petition No. 158/2008 (s) and Writ Petition No.974/2008 (s).

(2.) The petitioner was working as Assistant Sub Inspector in the respondent Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti from 01.01.1991. His services were terminated by an oral order dated 16.01.1998. He challenged his termination from service by raising an industrial dispute contending that his services were terminated orally without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act). On failure of conciliation the Deputy Labour Commissioner in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Section 10 of the Act, referred the following dispute to the Labour Court, Ujjain for adjudication :-

(3.) On receipt of the reference the Labour Court gave opportunity to the parties to submit their claim and reply. After recording the evidence led by the parties, the Labour Court answered the reference vide award dated 23.09.2005 passed in Case No.51/2004/IDR in favour of the petitioner and directed reinstatement of the petitioner in service with 25% back wages. Feeling aggrieved by the said award the respondent employer had filed a writ petition No.1841/2006 (s). The learned Single Judge of this Court vide common order dated 05.04.2007 allowed the said writ petition and connected writ petitions bearing Nos. 2458/2005 (s), 1839/2006 (s) and 1842/2006 (s) and remanded the matter to the Labour Court to re-examine the issue keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court in (1) HIMANSHU KUMAR VIDYARTHI V. STATE OF BIHAR, 1997 4 JT 560, (2) State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi, 2006 AIR(SC) 1806, (3) GENERAL MANAGER, HARYANA ROADWAYS V. RUDHAN SINGH, 2005 5 SCC 591, (4) STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH V. LALIT KUMAR VERMA, 2007 1 SCC 575 and other cases, if any, on the issue. The learned Single Judge also observed that the Presiding Officer would appreciate the law laid down and would apply the said law to the facts of the case involved in the Reference and will accordingly answer to the reference on merits either way in accordance with law.