MARKET COMMITTEE, AMRITSAR Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed by the workman/respondent No. 1 praying therein that the provisions of Section of the Industrial Disputes Act, are not being complied with by the petitioner. He states in the said application that the workman is unemployed after the termination of his services by the petitioner. He prays that in the light of the order dated 12.02.2007 passed by this Court, the applicant-workman was entitled to last wages drawn from the date of award during the pendency of the writ petition.

(2.) Reply to the said application has been filed by the petitioner, wherein it has been stated that the workman is running his own catering business on Fatehgarh Churian Road, Ajnala and it has further been stated that he is running a dairy. To this reply, respondent No. 1-workman has filed a rejoinder, wherein he has categorically stated that he is not running any catering business nor is he running any dairy business, as has been alleged by the petitioner. He further states that no name and style or address, from where the catering business is conducted by the workman or from where the workman is running the dairy, has been mentioned. He submits that unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that the workman is employed in any establishment, the Court would not pass an order, which would be contrary to the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act.

(3.) I have gone through the pleadings of the parties and am of the opinion that the petitioner has been unable to prove that the workman is employed in any establishment.