ANJANI KUMAR Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these above titled six writ petitions filed by the workmen, the controversy involved is as to whether the services of the petitioners workmen were terminated by respondent No.2 Meenakshi Public School, Sector 10-A, Gurgaon or they had abandoned the job. The references made to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon (for short, "the Tribunal") was answered against the workmen vide different awards. Therefore, with the consent of the parties, the above stated six writ petitions are taken up collectively for disposal. For facility of reference, facts are being taken from CWP-3709-2013 titled Anjani Kumar Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon and another.

(2.) As per petitioner Anjani Kumar, he was appointed by respondent No.2/School as a Head Mali on 1.3.2000 and he was performing his duties satisfactorily. However, his services were illegally terminated on 09.09.2004 without issuance of any notice or payment of compensation under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, "the Act"). Petitioner raised an industrial dispute by issuance of demand notice, on the basis of which learned Tribunal decided the reference against the workman holding that it was a case of abandonment of job.

(3.) The management came with the plea that the services of the petitioner were not terminated. In fact, the petitioner had abandoned the job on 21.06.2004 and as such, the petitioner was not entitled to any compensation under Section 25-F of the Act or reinstatement with continuity of service in any way and the learned Tribunal has rightly decided the controversy by pronouncing the impugned award.