HINDUSTAN WIRES LIMITED Vs. JANARDAN KUNDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ application has been heard at the admission stage along with the application made by the workman under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act.

(2.) In the writ petition the petitioner has challenged the award dated July 8, 1996 passed by the First Industrial Tribunal holding that the termination of service of the workman concerned was illegal and unjustified and directing his reinstatement in service with continuity in service and back wages from May 1, 1989 till the date of joining.

(3.) The aforesaid award has been challenged by the petitioner company on several grounds. Apart from challenging the very legality of the reference made under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, it has also been contended inter alia that there has been a perversity in the findings in as much as admittedly the workman concerned underwent open heart surgery necessitating replacement of two valves and was unable to carry out the work assigned to him and for the aforesaid reasons he continued to be absent and in fact was unable to resume his duty which was not taken into consideration by the Tribunal. It has further been contended that the impugned order of termination was really a discharge simpliciter because of the inability of the workman to continue in service because of his serious ailments and it was not a dismissal from service and the same also did not amount to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act.