RAM KARAN Vs. P O LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the workman challenging the award of the Labour Court, dated November 20, 1997 (copy Annexure P/2) vide which his prayer for reinstatement and consequential benefits was rejected.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a peon on January 27, 1977. He was terminated on September 23, 1978. He raised an industrial dispute vide demand notice, dated July 26, 1995, because of which reference was made to the Labour Court. The case of the petitioner is that there was a criminal case registered against him and his services were terminated because of the said criminal case. The criminal case prolonged for a long time and ultimately he filled an application under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code in the High Court for quashing of the FIR and the same was quashed on July 8, 1994. According to the petitioner as his services were terminated due to the pendency of criminal case, the cause of action for issuing demand notice arose after the quashing of the FIR in that case and, therefore, there is no delay. The Labour Court rejected the claim of the petitioner because of delay.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 has taken up a contention that the petitioner has not completed 240 days of service; that he was arrested by the police in an embezzlement case; that after he was released on bail the workman never reported for duties and absented himself and that new recruitment of salesman was made in the absence of the petitioner and the petitioner never raised any objection till the date of the demand notice.