DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER Vs. MANGAT RAM & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the Award of the Labour Court dated 24.10.2005 (Annexure P-5), whereby the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as workman) was ordered to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and 50% of back wages from the date of issuance of demand notice.

(2.) It is the case of the workman in his statement of claim that he was appointed as a Beldar, a daily-paid labourer on 1.1.1988 and continued to work till 31.08.2000 and that the workman has worked for more than 240 days continuously in every calendar year. However, the services of the workman have been terminated without any compensation or notice and hence such acation of the Managment is illegal. On such reference being raised, however, the learned Labour Court returned a finding that the workman has worked for 306 days in the year 1995 and that such retrenchment was without payment of entitled compensation and therefore, ordered to reinstate the workman with payment of back wages.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in the absence of any finding regarding the completion of 240 days in a calendar year preceding the date of termination, which as per the workman is 21.08.2000, the finding recorded by the learned Labour Court that there is violation of Section 25-F of the Industiral Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is not sustainable. It is further contended that though there is delay in challenging the Award, but since the effect of the Award, amounts to violation of the Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India, therefore, the delay in challenging the Award can not perpetuate illegality i.e. reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service.