SATISH KUMAR Vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Services of the appellant who was engaged as a Daily Wage Worker, were terminated. The appellant raised an Industrial Dispute challenging the termination, primarily on the ground that before terminating his services, compliance of the mandatory provisions contained in Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 (for short,'the Act') was not done, inasmuch as the appellant was not paid any retrenchment compensation or notice, though, he had rendered service of more than 240 days in preceding 12 months prior to termination of his services.

(2.) The reference was made to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-I, Chandigarh, with the following terms:-

(3.) This issue is decided in his favour and on that basis, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, ordered his reinstatement in service. However, while doing so, the Tribunal also found that the persons junior to the appellant had been regularised in service and on that basis gave direction to the respondent/ management to regularise the services of the appellant within a reasonable time and protecting his services as well.