ARVIND ENGINEERS Vs. KESHAV YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite service, no one appears on behalf of the respondent- workman. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. This intra-court appeal, under Clause X of the Letters Patent, is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.2.2018, passed by the learned Single Judge, allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent- workman challenging the award of the Labour Court.

(2.) The respondent-workman, working as a Pressman with the appellant-Company, submitted his resignation vide letter dated 15.12.2003, stating therein for settlement of his outstanding dues immediately. The resignation letter was accepted and the appellant-employer is stated to have settled the outstanding dues, by making payment of Rs.17,175/- in cash. Thereafter, the respondent-workman raised a dispute by issuing a demand notice dated 18.12.2003, on which a reference was made. The Labour Courtholding that it was a case of voluntary resignation submitted by the workman and not a case of termination, answered the reference against him.

(3.) Aggrieved, the respondent-workman challenged the award of the Labour Court in a writ petition. The learned Single Judge, vide the judgment and order impugned in this appeal, allowed the writ petition mainly on the ground that the resignation letter was accepted in undue haste and being a model employer, appellant was supposed to enquire from the workman as to why he had submitted his resignation, keeping in view the length of service rendered by him.