BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by Bahadur singh, ex-assistant driver, employed in the municipal Water Supply Scheme, Yamuna nagar, and by Smt. Sona Devi, widow, and faqir Chand, son of late Inder Lal, another driver, employed in the said scheme. Sri Inder lal died on 1 May 198o. Bahadur Singh and inder Lal were employed as assistant drivers in the Municipal Water Supply Scheme with effect from 28 March 1967 and 1 February 1966 respectively. Their claim was that they were so employed on permanent basis. It appears that with effect from 1 September 1968, the administrative control of the said water supply scheme was taken over by the public Health Department, Haryana, under the charge of the Executive Engineer, Public health Division, Ambala Cantonment, who terminated their services, vide orders, dated 6 December 1972, annexes P2 and P1, respectively, stating that their services were no longer required with immediate effect. The grievance of the workmen was that they were in the employment of the Municipal committee, Yamuna Nagar, in the Water supply Scheme. There was an industrial dispute between the workmen of this scheme on the one hand and the Municipal Committee on the other. A settlement was arrived at between the workmen and the management on 16 January 1967 (annexe P4 ). The management later backed out of this settlement and the workmen were agitating for its implementation. It was then considered proper by the authorities that the administrative control of the Water Supply Scheme should be handed over to the Public Health department, Haryana, and it was so done. The Executive Engineer, Public Health, issued orders of transfer of the workmen to places outside Yamuna Nagar. They protested against these orders and contended that he had no jurisdiction to transfer them outside the municipal limits of Yamuna Nagar. As a result thereof, orders, annexure P2 and p1, had been passed. Besides Bahadur singh and Inder Lal, two other workmen whose services were terminated were Sunder lal and Madan Lal. They later entered into a settlement with the Executive Engineer on 5 October 1981, vide annexure P3.

(2.) THE petitioners sought reference of the industrial dispute as regards their wrongful termination of services but the State Government declined to make a reference. They, therefore, filed Civil Writ Petition No. 264 of 1974, in this Court which was allowed by harbans Lal, J. , vide judgment, dated 11 January 1980, annexure R 1/1 A direction was issued that the industrial dispute stated above should be referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. The matter thus came up for decision before the Presiding Officer, labour Court, Haryana, Faridabad, respondent 4, who made his award, annexure P10, on 24 December 1982, which was published in the Government gazette, dated 22 March 1083. There were the following material issues for adjudication before respondent 4 :

(3.) ALL these issues were decided by respondent 4 against the workmen. As a result, it was held that they were not entitled to any relief. The petitioners being aggrieved against this award have impugned the same in this writ petition.