SHIV DAYAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of the two writ petitions, i,e,. C. W. P. No. 1734] of 1994 and C. W. P. No. 18268 of 1994, as the question of law required to be determined in both the petitions is identical. In both these petitions, a challenge has been made to the orders passed by the Government of Haryana refusing to make reference of the dispute raised by the petitioners in relation to the termination of their services.

(2.) IN brief, facts of C. W. P. No. 17341 of 1994 are that the Petitioner-workman was appointed as a dryer operator in the service of respondent No. 2, on August 14, 1986, on monthly salary of Rs. 500/- His salary was increased from time to time and he was getting Rs. 2,200 per month on the date of termination of his service. A domestic enquiry was held by the management of respondent No. 2 in regard to the allegations of misconduct levelled against the petitioner. The enquiry officer found him guilty. Thereafter, the management of respondent No. 2 issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner and, finally, terminated his service on August 11, 1993, The petitioner submitted a notice of demand dated October 12, 1993. Conciliation proceedings were held by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Karnal. He submitted a report under Section 12 (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, indicating that there was no-possibility of compromise. Thereafter, the Government issued order, annexure P-4, and refused to make reference of the dispute on the ground that the petitioner had settled accounts with the management.

(3.) IN . C. W. P. No. 18268 of 1994, the petitioner has pleaded that he was appointed as a dryer operator in the service of respondent No. 2 with effect from September 18, 1989. Initially, he was paid Rs. 850 per month. Later on, this amount was increased to Rs. 1,700 per month. His service was terminated on the basis of a domestic enquiry. He challenged the termination of his service. The Assistant Labour Commissioner submitted his failure report under Section 12 (4) and thereafter the Government has passed the impugned order, annexure P-4, refusing to make a reference.