HARI SINGH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge here is to the award of the Labour Court wherein it was held that abandonment of job by the petitioner-workman does not amount to retrenchment and consequently compensation was not required to be paid in terms of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) The petitioner-workman was in the employment of respondment No. 2 at a monthly salary of Rs. 253/-. His services were terminated on November 27, 1980 as he had abandoned the job of his own accord by remaining absent. His name was consequently struck off from the Attendance Register of the management in terms of clause 16 of the Certified Standing Orders.

(3.) The action of the management gave rise to an industrial dispute which was ultimately referred for adjudication to the Labour Court, Rohtak. The dispute referred for adjudication was in the following terms :-