RAJ KUMAR Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner-workman (hereinafter referred to as, "workman") has laid challenge to Award dtd. 29/3/2017 passed by the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, Kangra at Dharamshala (HP) (hereinafter referred to as, "Tribunal") in Reference No. 539/2015, whereby learned Tribunal awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs.75,000.00 in favour of the workman-in-lieu of the back wages, seniority, past service benefits as well as other consequential service benefits.

(2.) Precisely the facts as emerge from the record are that the Appropriate Government made following reference under Sec. 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as, "Act") to the Tribunal:

(3.) The workman claimed before learned Tribunal that he was engaged by the authorities on daily wage basis on Muster Roll in the year 1998. He continued to work upto the year 1999, as such, he had completed 240 days. The workman alleged that his services were unlawfully terminated by the respondent verbally in the year 1999 without issuing one month's notice and retrenchment compensation, as envisaged under Sec. 25-F of the Act. The workman claimed before learned Tribunal that since the respondent violated provisions of Sec. 25 of the Act, his oral termination deserves to be set aside. While placing on record factum with regard to retention of his juniors at the time of his retrenchment, workman also alleged that the principle of "last come, first go" was also not followed by the respondent. He further claimed that after his termination, respondent engaged many persons, who subsequently worked as daily wage Beldars but at no point in time, opportunity, if any, was ever afforded to him for reemployment, as such, action of the respondent, which is in sheer violation of the provisions contained under Sec. 25-H of the Act, deserves to be quashed and set aside.