STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. KALU RAM GURJAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition for writ is preferred to question validity, correctness and propriety of the award dated 25.5.2006 passed by the Labour Court, Bhilwara, in Labour Dispute No. 9 of 2001 Shri Kalu Ram Gurjar v. Executive Engineer and Another. The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that the appropriate government under a notification dated 27.12.2000 referred an industrial dispute to the Labour Court, Bhilwara, for its adjudication in the terms that "Whether the termination of workman Shri Kalu Ram Gurjar S/o. Shri Pratap Gurjar represented by General Secretary, Jaldaay karmchari Sangh, Bhilwara from service by the employer Executive Engineer, Jaldaay Vibhag, Shahpura and Assistant Engineer, Jaldaay Vibhag, Jahajpur from the month July 1999 is just and proper? If not, then for what relief the workman is entitled?".

(2.) The respondent-workman submitted a statement of claim before the Labour Court stating therein that he was employed under different water supply schemes under the control of the respondents from 21.2.1996 to 30.6.1999. On 1.7.1999, he was not permitted to join the duties and was terminated from service and without adhering the procedure prescribed under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, hereinafter referred to 'as the Act of 1947'). As per the workman, his termination from service was retrenchment as defined under Section 2(oo) of the Act of 1947 and that was effected without adhering the mandatory conditions precedent to do so.

(3.) A return to the claim was filed by the employer with assertion that the petitioner was working with them through a contractor and as such, no relationship of "Master and Servant" or "Employer and Workman" was existing and in the absence of such relationship, there was no need to adhere the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act of 1947. It was also slated in the return that the workman has also not completed continuous service as defined under Section 25-B of the Act of 1947.