TRILOCHAN MOHANTA Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BARIPADA ELECTRICAL DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Writ Petition the workmen being the second party members in Industrial Dispute Case No.17/1998 of the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar, has assailed the award passed on 31st January, 2006.

(2.) THE Industrial Dispute was referred to the Industrial Court by the State Government to determine whether the action taken by the Executive Engineer, Baripada Electrical Division, Baripada, the Opp. Party, in terminating the services of Trilochan Mohanta and others on 30.6.1995 is legal and or justified? If not, to what relief they are entitled to. The workmen were represented by the Working President, O.S.E.B., Workers Association. They alleged that the workmen were working under the management of N.M.R. since 1988 and continued in their, employment till the date of their termination on 30.6.1995 in respect of all the, workmen except one workman, Saroj Kumar Mohanta, whose services were terminated on 30.5.1995. The workmen alleged that the management without any rhyme or reason terminated their services without following the mandate of Section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The workmen further alleged that after such termination the management have regularized the services of fifteen numbers of junior N.M.R. workers in the year 1995, but their cases were not considered by the management despite their approach. After such termination, the workman approached the Labour Machinery, but the conciliation proceeding initiated by the District Labour Officer, Mayurbhanj, Baripada ended in failure and the matter was ultimately referred to the Labour Court by the Government. On such factual pleadings the workmen have claimed for their reinstatement in service with back wages along with the service benefits.

(3.) IN course of hearing the workmen examined Trilochan Mohanta, W.W.1, and relied upon a certificate indicating his engagement under the management, which was marked as Ext.1. On the other hand, the management has neither examined any witness nor relied upon any document in support of its case.