STATE OF HP Vs. JAGGI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions (particulars given in the heading of the judgment) are being disposed of by a common judgment, as common question of law is involved in both the petitions. These petitions have been filed by the State of H.P. and its functionaries, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing awards of the Presiding Judge, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla.

(2.) Jaggi Ram, respondent in CWP 3758 of 2009, was engaged as a workman on daily wage basis Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? in the Department of Agriculture, for working in Seed Multiplication Farm, Bhagani, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, in the year 1985. He continued to work in the Seed Farm of Agriculture Department, till 1995, when, according to him, his services were terminated. He completed 240 days only in one calendar year, that is, 1987. In rest of the years, he worked for less than 240 days in every year. He claimed that his services had been dispensed with by a word of mouth. No notice, in accordance with the provision of Section 25-F (a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 had been issued, nor had any compensation been paid, in accordance with Section 25-F (b) of the said Act and hence, the order of retrenchment, was ultra vires and of no consequence. On respondent's asking, reference was made to the Industrial Tribunal by the Government. Reference was to the following effect:

(3.) Present writ petitioners pleaded that respondent had himself abandoned the job in the year 1985. It was stated that he had not been in continuous service for a period of one year, within the meaning of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and hence, there was no question of non compliance of the provisions of aforesaid section.