MANGE RAM Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-workman, Mange Ram has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution by challenging the order dated 9/04/1982, passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak, in Application No. 6 of 1979 filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity "the Act"), in which prayer was made for grant of salary from 13/11/1972, till 10/12/1975.

(2.) The brief facts of the case as revealed in the present petition are that the petitioner was a regular employee of the Haryana Electricity ] Board (for brevity "the Board"). He proceeded on leave on the ground of sickness on 6/11/1972, and on recovery from sickness on 13/11/1972, he reported for duty along with a medical fitness certificate from a registered medical practitioner. However, the allegation is that he was not allowed to join the duty. He represented to the executive engineer as well as Chief Engineer (Operation) of the Board at Chandigarh by sending registered acknowledgment due notices dated March 21, 197 3/01/197 4/09/1974, December 24, 197 4/03/1975, and 18/08/1975. Eventually, he was allowed to join on 10/12/1975. The charge-sheet is alleged to have been issued on 15/09/1977, which is received by the petitioner on 21/08/1978, in which allegations have been levelled that the petitioner remained absent from duty from 6/11/1972 to 10/12/1975. He replied to the charge-sheet on 20/09/1978. However, no action was taken by respondent No. 2. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Act claiming salary for the period 6/11/197 2/12/1975. After the filing of this application, respondent No. 3/02/1980 (annexure P. 1) passed an order that the period of absence from 6/11/1972, to 10/12/1975, would be treated as leave of the kind due.

(3.) In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and 3, the stand taken is that the petitioner was asked to submit medical certificate on 17/11/1972, by the S.D.O. (Operations), Haryana State Electricity Board, Panipat, vide letter annexure R-3/1 but he failed. It has further been averred that the petitioner did not wish to join at the place of posting given to him after transfer, i.e., Pehowa. Copy of the order dated 21/03/1973, posting the petitioner at Pehowa has been placed on record as annexure R-3/2. Thereafter, on 28/02/1974; the petitioner was given posting in the office of the Chief Auditor, Haryana State Electricity Board, Chandigarh, vide annexure R-3/3. He did not even join at Chandigarh. On 24/11/1975, he was again given posting order and he joined accordingly. Therefore, it is asserted that the petitioner remained absent from duty from 6/11/1972, to 10/12/1975. With regard to the application filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Act, the respondents have admitted this fact. The Labour Court on the basis of the averments made, framed the following issues: