SOHAN SINGH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sohan Singh petitioner invokes Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the award of Labour Court, Union Territory, Chandigarh.

(2.) The relevant facts are that petitioner had joined the Haryana State Electricity Board on 25.5.1956. He was promoted as Line Man in December, 1958 and as Assistant Foreman in 1970. The petitioner was a confirmed employee. He had proceeded on leave. He came to join the duties but he was not allowed to do so. His services were terminated. The petitioner challenged the termination of his service by raising an industrial dispute. He had contended that he had rendered more than 21 years of service.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 contested the claim of the workman and took up the preliminary objection that the head office of Haryana State Electricity Board was situated at Panchkula. The Labour Court at Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. The petitioner-workman is alleged to have served at Sadhaura. The demand notice was served after 10 years. The petitioner had not submitted any medical certificate. No leave application was received.