INDUSIND BANK LTD. & ANOTHER Vs. RAMESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) - By way of present writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner i.e. Deputy Director of Agriculture, Bilaspur, has assailed the judgment dated 27.4.2010, passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Dharamshala in Reference No. 157 of 2007, whereby the ld. Tribunal while answering terms of reference referred to him held termination of the petitioner Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? Yes. bad and accordingly, set-aside and quashed the same being in violation of the provisions of the Sections 25-G and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( "The Act " for the sake of brevity). Learned Tribunal has further directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent with all consequential benefits, except back-wages.

(2.) Briefly stated facts as emerge from the record of the case are that respondent-petitioner (respondent herein) was engaged as beldar on daily wage by the petitioner-department w.e.f. 15.11.1994 and as such, he continued to work with the department till 31.10.1998. Thereafter, his service was terminated by the petitioner department in complete violation of the provisions enumerated in the Act.

(3.) The respondent (applicant therein) being aggrieved with his termination preferred OA No. 33/99 before the learned HP Administrative Tribunal at Shimla for redressal of his grievance. Learned Tribunal taking cognizance of the averments contained in the Original Application while issuing notices to the State (respondent therein) stayed his termination. However, fact remains that at later point of time, the application was dismissed on 24.8.2004, as a result of which, the petitioner-department again terminated the service of the respondent-applicant.