RAMESH CHAND Vs. STATE H.P. & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present writ petition filed under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has laid challenge to the impugned award dated 17.5.2010, passed by learned Presiding Judge, Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Dharamshala, H.P., in Reference Petition No.21 of 2008, whereby learned Tribunal held the termination of the petitioner illegal and accordingly directed the respondent to re-engage the petitioner forthwith along with the continuity in service and seniority, except back wages. The petitioner, being aggrieved with the denial of back wages has approached this Court by way of present writ petition seeking therein following reliefs:-

(2.) Briefly stated facts, as emerge from the record are that the petitioner was engaged a Chowkidar with the respondent in September, 2005, wherein he continued to work as such till August, 2006. The petitioner claimed that his services were illegally terminated in August, 2006 in violation of the principle Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Act'). Petitioner also claimed that prior to his illegal retrenchment, he had completed 240 days in the preceding 12 calendar months prior to his termination and as such, respondent was under obligation to issue notice under Section 25-F of the Act before termination. Petitioner also claimed that at the time of his termination, respondent also retained persons juniors to him and as such, violated the principle of Last Come First Go as enshrined under Section 25-G of the Act. Petitioner categorically stated that the respondent after his retrenchment, appointed a new person as a Security Guard without affording him any opportunity in violation of Section 25-H of the Act. Petitioner also claimed that the respondent failed to pay an amount of Rs.28,560/- payable to him on account of over time, leave encashment and wages pertaining to weekly and national holidays. Since, respondent failed to redress the grievance of the petitioner, petitioner raised a Industrial Dispute by serving a demand notice on the respondent and in this regard appropriate government referred the matter to the Labour Court and made following reference to the learned Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court for adjudication:-

(3.) Learned Tribunal on the basis of the evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, passed the impugned award dated 17.5.2010, whereby termination of the petitioner was held to be illegal being in violation to the provisions of the Act and accordingly directed the respondent to re-engage the petitioner forthwith along with the continuity in service and seniority, except back wages. Since, no back wages were granted to the present petitioner, he filed the present petition praying therein for reliefs, as have been reproduced herein above. It may be noticed here that no appeal whatsoever, has been filed by the respondent against the impugned award, passed by the learned Tribunal, meaning thereby award was accepted by the respondent in to.