KULSACHIV MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIK VISHWA VIDHYALAY Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR LAKHERA SHRI RAMCHARAN LAKHERA STENO-TYPIST DISTRICT AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the validity of impugned order dated 7. 8. 2000 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jabalpur in Case No. 12/98 I. D. Act whereby the application under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity, 'the Act') filed by respondent No. 1 has been allowed and it has been directed to the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 26,222/ -.

(2.) IN the application under Section 33-C (2) of the Act it is prayed by the respondent No. 1 that he is entitled to get the following payments from the department: i As per advertisement published in newspaper for appointment to termination (resignation) payment shall be done as per State Government U. G. C. Grade; ii. Appointment order dated 24. 9. 97 Steno Typist, the condition that the applicant will be entitled for dearness allowances as per Government rate, which was not paid to the applicant; iii. Nine day payment withheld from 1. 10. 98 to 9. 10. 98, Rs. 1656/-only; iv. Rs. 600/- Examination conducted by the applicant, and was duly ordered by the non-applicants. In this manner the respondent No. 1 claimed an amount of Rs. 26,262/ -.

(3.) A written statement was filed by the present petitioner refuting the averments made in the application. In the written statement it has been pleaded that indeed respondent No. 1, since he got Government job, resigred from the services and the resignation was accepted by the management. It was denied that T. A. advance was not properly adjusted. According to the petitioner the respondent No. 1 received entire amount as per record. Even for conducting examination a sum of Rs. 365/- has been paid to him by the department. Similarly, Tour Allowance of Rs. 938/- was paid to him through cheque dated 21. 11. 98. The entire amount of T. A. and D. A. and remuneration for conducting examination was paid to the respondent No. 1 vide cheque dated 24. 12. 98, amounting to Rs 1,754/ -. According to the stand taken in the written statement by the petitioner the respondent No. 1 applied for leave w. e. f. 26. 9. 98 to 29. 9. 98 and also for 3rd October, 1998 which was sanctioned. The extra-ordinary leave was sanctioned without pay from 26th to 29th September and 3rd October, 1998. The respondent No. 1 did not show any interest in the University work. Five days leave was adjusted in the month of October. Specific plea was also raised in para 8 of the written statement that the respondent No. 1 cannot claim UGC scale and for that there should be a reference under the Act. Without reference there cannot be any adjudication. On the basis of these submissions it was prayed that the application be dismissed.