BABULAL Vs. NARMADA SAHAKARI TEL PRAKRIYA SAMITI MARYADIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was employee of respondent No. 1 which owns a factory of Oil Extraction at Barwaha. The petitioner was appointed as peon by order dated 29-6-90 and was later on confirmed on the said post. The contention of the petitioner is that he continued in service without any break right from 29-6-90 to 23-1-1993 as permanent employee. The petitioner is challenging his order of termination of service passed by respondent No. 2, and is also praying for quashing of Annexures P-1, P-2 and P-3.

(2.) A statement by the counsel appearing for parties has been made that similar orders were challenged by other employees in M. P. No. 533 of 93 and the said petition was allowed by this court on 24-6-94. The counsel have further submitted that this petition is also identical in nature and can be disposed of on the same lines.

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record. Respondent no. 1 had incurred huge losses. In order to salvage the situation committee, comprising Additional Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Executive Director, Oil fed and General Manager (Project) Oil Fed was constituted to suggest ways and means to overcome the problems. This committee suggested, inter alia, that Factory together with its establishment, including employees be handed over to respondent no. 1 on lease. This suggestion was accepted and agreement was executed between respondent No. 1 and No. 2. The petitioner as also other employees were thus asked to work under respondent No. 2 under the same terms and conditions of the employment. The respondent No. 2, however, terminated the contract of service, without assigning any reasons and directed payment of one month's salary in terms of clause (2) of the contract. Dis-satisfied by the termination the petitioner has filed this petition.