STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SHYAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the employer challenging the award of the Labour Court dated April 5, 2000 (copy Annexure P -3) vide which respondent No. 1 was ordered to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and 50% back wages.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner, we find that this writ petition is without merit.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has argued that the work for which respondent No. 1 was employed, was of a seasonal nature. The work in the Forest Department may be of a seasonal nature or may not be so. It is a question of fact to be pleaded and decided in each case. It has not been shown as to what evidence has been led to show that the work was of a seasonal nature. Moreover, for the said plea, no issue has been pressed for in the Court below.