RADHESHYAM Vs. NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD, NEEMUCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by order dated 14.7.2017 passed in case No.43/2016 Industrial Dispute Act (Reference) by Labour Court, Mandsaur; whereby, the relief of reinstatement with full back wages has been denied. The facts of the case are that the petitioner raised a industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Indore. Respondent participated in the conciliation proceeding which ended into a failure.By order dated 26.7.2016, office of the Labour Commissioner, Indore has referred the dispute to the Labour Court for adjudication.

(2.) The terms of the reference are reproduced below:-

(3.) After the aforesaid reference, the Labour Court has registered the same as Case No.43/2016 and thereafter the petitioner being a first party filed a statement of claim. According to the petitioner, he was engaged on 1.4.1983 by the second party in Sitaram Jaju Sagar Reservoir as peon and for maintenance of the garden. He was engaged as a daily rated employee by an oral order. He had been discontinued from services by oral order on 31.3.1990. Before termination no notice and retrenchment compensation was given to him. He worked continuously from 1983 to 1990, specially 240 days in one calendar year. Therefore, without complying the provision of 25-F of the Industrial dispute Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as Act of 1947), the respondents could not have terminated his services; therefore, termination is illegal and he is entitled for reinstatement with full back wages.