EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT CANAL REST HOUSE, BHIWANI NOW EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BOND WATER SERVICES DIVISION, BHIWANI Vs. DEVENDER C/O CHETAN ANAND, DISTRICT PRESIDENT B M S , BHIWANI, AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the award dated 30.11.2007 (Annexure-P-5), passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak, vide which the reference has been answered in favour of the workman, holding him entitled to reinstatement on previous post with continuity of service and 50% back wages from the date of demand notice i.e. 12.08.1999.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner contends that even if the findings as recorded by the Labour Court are taken to be correct that there is violation of the provisions of Sections 25-F, 25-G, and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act but still the workman would not be entitled to reinstatement in service as his appointment was on purely temporary basis as a casual labourer. He further contends that as the appointment of the workman was not on a sanctioned post neither was it a regular post nor the statutory rules governing the service were complied with and the workman was not holding the post which would entitle him to reinstatement in service. He further contends that the reinstatement as ordered by the Labour Court on his previous post is illegal for the reason that his appointment was neither on regular post nor on a sanctioned post as he was appointed as a casual labourer. He further contends that a person entitled to reinstatement in service should have been appointed in accordance with the statutory rules governing the service and further compliance of the principles as envisaged under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India were mandatory which in the present case have admittedly not been followed.

(3.) He relies upon the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Ghaziabad Development Authority and another v. Ashok Kumar and another, 2008 4 SCC 261, Mahboob Deepak v. Nagar Panchayat, Gajraula, 2008 1 SCC 575, M.P. Administration v. Tribhuwan, 2007 9 SCC 748 and State of M.P. and others v. Lalit Kumar Verma, 2007 1 SCC 575, wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held that the post under the State is required to be filled up in terms of the Recruitment Rules and by inviting applications from all eligible candidates, if not so filled, the employer would have no right to reinstatement in service even if Industrial Disputes Act is violated while terminating the services.