STATE OF HARYANA Vs. KALU RAM AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for challenging the award of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court dated 24. 11. 1998, copy Annexure P9, vide which respondent No. 1 was ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service and full back wages from the date of demand notice i. e. 4. 3. 1995.

(2.) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties, we find that this writ petition is without any merit.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 was appointed as a casual labourer on 1. 4. 1985. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No. 1 worked till September, 1990 and then left the job of his own. Thereafter respondent No. 1 was appointed in February, 1991 and he continued uplo31. 12. 1992. Counsel for the petitioner further argues that respondent No. 1 again left the job and his services were not terminated.