BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Vs. RAJESH VYAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are aggrieved from the order of H.P. Administrative Tribunal, Shimla dated 22nd May, 1998, in OA No. (D)-16/98. By means of impugned order the Petitioners, (they were Respondents before the Tribunal), have been directed to re-engage the Respondent in the same capacity in which he was working at the time of his termination. His period of absence between dis-engagement and re-engagement was to be counted for the purpose of seniority and he was held not entitled for back wages for the period he remained absent. Respondents were further directed not to terminate his services except in accordance with law.

(2.) We have examined the pleadings of the parties before the Tribunal. Petitioner claimed that he was terminated without following the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, therefore, he was entitled to the relief of re-engagement etc. as claimed in his O.A. On the other hand, stand of the Petitioners was that engagement of Respondent No. 1 was under a particular scheme namely "Kangra Towards Self Reliance". This scheme was for three years. After it came to an end, Petitioner was dis-engaged with effect from 1st November, 1997. That being the position the impugned order of the Tribunal was unjust, illegal besides being contrary to law. A perusal of the impugned order shows that its brevity is its beauty without having legally examined pleas raised in the pleadings. Order in our view is cryptic.

(3.) Faced with such a situation, an attempt was made by the learned Counsel for the Respondent to persuade the Court that impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity calling for interference in this writ petition.