ISHWAR NATH JHA Vs. PO INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL BATHINDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a misdescription in cause-title in the reference and in this petition. The 3rd respondent is the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, which is represented by Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate.

(2.) The claim is against the 2nd respondent i.e. M/s Malwa Motors. As per office report dtd. 23/12/2014, M/s Malwa Motors was served with the summons issued by this Court with the next date of hearing fixed at 5/1/2015. No one has entered appearance on behalf of 2nd respondent despite service. In these circumstances, 2nd respondent is proceeded against ex parte.

(3.) The petitioner challenges the award dtd. 8/1/2014 limited to the compensation awarded in lieu of reinstatement. Mr. Arun Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that Rs.27,000.00 only as compensation is inadequate, unreasonable and in arbitrary exercise of discretion as no reason whatsoever has been given by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Bathinda to reach and justify this meager figure.