KARAMJIT KAUR Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the order of the Industrial Tribunal dtd. 4/6/2013. The petitioners are legal heirs of deceased-Leela Singh. Deceased-Leela Singh was appointed as a Gate Keeper on 19/3/2000. His services were terminated on 30/6/2004. The same is disputed by the respondents contending that deceased-Leela Singh was terminated on 10/6/2004. Admittedly, termination order or terminating the services of deceased-Leela Singh is based on certain complaints. The complaints have been taken into consideration by the Committee of the respondents. To that extent they have passed a resolution to terminate the services of the deceased-Leela Singh. Deceased-Leela Singh raised an industrial dispute which was the subject matter before the Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal held that order of termination is illegal.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that deceased- Leela Singh has served for more than 3 years. Therefore, grant of compensation of Rs.30,000.00 is not sufficient. In fact, deceased-Leela Singh was entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages for the reasons that his termination was illegal and arbitrary since no enquiry has been held. Due to death of Leela Singh compensation has been awarded.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents- Management submitted that deceased Leela Singh's termination is based on the complaints. Complaints have been examined by the Committee and resolution has been passed to terminate the services of the deceased-Leela Singh. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order of termination. Respondents have not filed writ petition. In other words, they have accepted the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal and there is no infirmity in the Award passed by the Industrial Tribunal.