PROMILA DEVI Vs. ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF

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. 26/2/2018, passed by the Labour Court-cum- Industrial Tribunal, Kangra at Dharamshala (HP) (hereinafter referred to as, "Tribunal") in Ref No. 737/2016, whereby learned Tribunal awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs.35,000.00 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 she was engaged by the authorities on daily wage basis on Muster Roll with effect from November, 1998. She continued to work till, May, 2000, as such, she had completed 240 days. The workman alleged that her services were unlawfully terminated by the respondents verbally with effect from May, 2000, without issuing one month's notice and retrenchment compensation, as envisaged under Sec. 25F of the Act. The workman claimed before learned Tribunal that since the respondents violated provisions of Sec. 25 of the Act, her oral termination deserves to be set aside. While placing on record factum with regard to retention of her juniors at the time of her retrenchment, workman also alleged that the principle of 'last come, first go' was also not followed by the respondents. He further claimed that after her termination, respondents engaged many persons, who subsequently worked as daily wage Beldars but at no point in time, opportunity, if any, was ever afforded to her for re-employment, as such, action of the respondents, which is in sheer violation of the provisions contained under Sec. 25H of the Act, deserves to be quashed and set aside.