STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAMESH DASS AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been moved by the State of Haryana under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned award dated 1.5.1987 Annexure P.10 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to this petition are that Ramesh Dass-respondent (hereinafter to be referred as the workman) secured his appointment as Mali- cum-Chowkidar on the work charged basis in the name of Rameshwar Dass son of Sultan Singh vide order dated 10.2.1975 Annexure P.1. During his service, a theft of spare parts of the departmental truck No. HRB-2212 took place in the month of July, 1975. FIR was accordingly got registered against him in the name of Rameshwar Dass by the Sub-Divisional Engineer, Public Health Sub Division No. 5, Hisar. After this theft, he absented from his duties with effect from 19.7.1975. His services were terminated with effect from 19.7.1975. The petitioner-State is unaware of the outcome of the investigation conducted by the police authorities in the afore-mentioned FIR. After termination of his services, he got his name fraudulently registered under the assumed name of Ramesh Dass son of Sultan Singh resident of Village Dhani Qutabpur for the post of Pump Operator with the Employment Exchange, Hansi in the year 1979. On his name being sponsored by the Employment Exchange he was selected for the post of Pump Operator on work charged basis in 1979 by the Sub Divisional Engineer, Public Health Sub Division No. 2, Hansi under the name of Ramesh Dass. His joining report was accepted. The petitioner came to know that he was the same person, who had earlier been appointed in the year 1975 and had served as mali-cum-chowkidar in the above mentioned capacity. When this fact came to the notice of the petitioner, he was relieved from his duties. He made a representation to the Chief Engineer, Public Health Branch, Chandigarh to the effect that he was not being appointed in-spite of his having been selected by the quarter concerned. He did not disclose in his representation that he was not being given the appointment on account of charges of theft. As per instructions from the Chief Engineer, Public Health Branch Chandigarh, he was appointed as Pump Operator on casual basis with an undertaking that he would have no right to claim anything except for the period he actually remained on duty. A detailed report was sent to the Engineer in Chief, PWD, Public Health Branch, Chandigarh by the Superintending Engineer concerned. His services were consequently terminated. Feeling aggrieved therewith, he raised a labour dispute which was referred by the Government to the Court. Vide the impugned award dated 1.5.1987, the Labour Court directed the State to reinstate the workman with 50% back-wages from the date of termination of his services till the date of his reinstatement and shall not be given the benefit of previous service. Feeling aggrieved therewith, the State-petitioner has preferred this petition contending that this award is liable to be set aside in view of the reasons assigned in this petition.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties,besides perusing the findings returned by the Labour Court with due care and circumspection.