SECRETARY, HPSEB Vs. PIAR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as Board for short), feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award dated 18.10.2006, passed by learned Presiding Judge, H.P. Labour Court -cum -Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, Distt. Kangra, H.P., in reference No. 113/2003 (Annexure P -3), has preferred the present writ petition for quashing and setting the same. The legality and validity of the impugned award has been assailed on the grounds, inter alia, that the learned Tribunal below has failed to appreciate the pleadings as well as the evidence produced by the parties and has based its findings on surmises and conjectures. The findings, that the Board has violated Clause 14(2) of the Certified Standing Orders, are stated to be wrong and contrary to the record. No relief could have been granted by the Tribunal below, for the reason that the respondent -workman was engaged on daily wage basis on a particular work and on the completion thereof, his services were rightly dispensed with. The engagement of the petitioner on daily wage basis was subject to the availability of work. Since no work is stated to be available with the Board, therefore, the finding qua reinstatement of the respondent -workman has been sought to be set aside and quashed.

(2.) PURSUANT to the process issued, respondent -workman has put in appearance and he is represented by S/Shri Shashi Bhushan and Vikas Rathore, Advocates.

(3.) THE answer to the above poser, in all fairness as well as in the interest of justice, would be in negative, for the reason that as per the admitted case of the parties, the respondent -workman was engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in the year 1996. He continued as such till the year 2000. His services were dispensed with orally, without issuing a legal and valid notice as required under the law.