ZORA SINGH Vs. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION, CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was employed with the respondent- management as Store Clerk and as per his version, he was drawing his salary at the rate of Rs.605.30 Paise per month as on 8.3.1979 when on account of absence from duty, his services were terminated. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court, Patiala for adjudication. The Labour Court on appraisal of evidence led by the parties, gave its award dated 19.11.1981, copy Annexure P-l, against the petitioner. The petitioner has now challenged the award of the Labour Court, by filing the present writ petition, inter alia, on the grounds that termination of 4 his services amounted to retrenchment and this attracted the provisions of Sec. 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act and the said provisions having not been complied with before passing the termination order, termination of his services was illegal and thus the award of the Labour Court deserved to be quashed and as a consequence thereof, he was entitled to be reinstated into service with full back wages.

(2.) Upon notice, respondent 3 did not put in appearance at all. However, respondents 1 and 2 put in appearance as back as on 8.9.1982 and the writ petition was admitted to regular hearing on 20.9.1982, but no written statement has been filed till today on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that services of the petitioner were terminated without holding any regular inquiry and his termination being not on account of any misconduct on the part of the petitioner, the termination amounted to retrenchment. Learned counsel further submitted that in the wake of the above fact and the termination the petitioner having been ordered without complying with the mandatory provisions of Sec. 25-F of the Act, the award of the Labour Court deserved to be set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, further -submitted that the petitioner would give up the claim for back wages for the period he remained out of service of the respondent-management in case he is reinstated into service with continuity. The latter submission could not be seriously opposed by the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2. Thus, having regard to the fair stand taken by learned counsel for the petitioner and in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the award dated 19.11.1981, Annexure P-l passed by respondent-3 is quashed and the petitioner is ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service. The petitioner shall now report for duty to the respondent-management and on his being so done, the respondent-management shall take him back into service. The petitioner shall, however, not be entitled to back wages from the date of termination of his services till he rejoins his duties. It is, however, made clear that in the event of the respondent-management not allowing the petitioner to join his duties, the petitioner shall be entitled to full salary right from the date he would report for duty till the date of his retirement/superannuation, if otherwise eligible.