PRAHLAD BHAGAT Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge, in the present writ petition, is to the award dated 18.2.2014 (Annexure P3), whereby a sum of Rs. 50,000/ - has been awarded as compensation to the workman, which was to be paid within 45 days of the publication of the award, failing which he has been held entitled to the interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the amount is very paltry and the workman has been in litigation since June 1985 from the date his service had been terminated.

(3.) THE Labour Court has found that the petitioner was charge -sheeted on 24.1.1985 and the Enquiry Officer was appointed. The workman did not participate in the enquiry proceedings though notice of the proceedings had been published in the newspaper. An FIR under Section 457 & 380 IPC had also been lodged against him of which he had been acquitted. The finding has been recorded that the Enquiry Officer acted in a fair and proper manner by giving proper notice to the petitioner by way of publication in the newspaper to appear before him and enquiry proceedings could not be termed as improper, unfair and illegal. The workman had also requested for change of Enquiry Officer which was disposed of vide order dated 27.3.1985. However, the Labour Court had given the benefit under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (In short "the Act") on the ground of acquittal and has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/ - after taking into account that he had only four years of service to his credit and at the time of termination.