LOVE KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayed in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for quashing of orders dated 4.4.2002 and 30.6.2003 (Annexure P-2 & P-3 respectively) passed by respondent No. 2. The appropriate Government vide impugned order dated 4.4.2002 refused to refer the dispute to the Labour Court raised by the petitioner-workman, with regard to illegal termination of his service. The appeal filed by the petitioner-workman for review of the order dated 4.4.2002 was also dismissed on, 30.6.2003.

(2.) There is no representation for and on behalf of the petitioner-workman.

(3.) A perusal of file shows that the petitioner-workman challenging his termination had served a demand notice, which was contested by the management. Thereafter efforts for reconciliation were made but the same were failed. On receipt of failure report, the appropriate government vide impugned order dated 4.4.2002 refused to refer the matter to the Labour Court by observing as under: You are hereby informed that Govt. does not fit for reference your case to the Labour Court because you have completed only 199 days and you were engaged on temporary basis. The management terminated your services on the ground No Longer required. Therefore, termination of your services does not fall under the definition of retrenchment Under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the I.D. Act, 1947.