(1.) THE petitioner-Public Works Department has challenged the award passed by the labour Court Bharatpur dated 2. 11. 99 by which the workman-respondent No. 1 Dev Sukh's termination has been held illegal and invalid and he was ordered to be reinstated with full back wages since it was held that his termination was in-contravention of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. THE Labour Court specifically recorded a finding that the petitioner-Department had failed to prove its plea that the respondent-workman had been engaged for a fixed period in the Famine Relief Operation as no Notification to that effect was ever produced before the Labour Court. In so far as the computation of the number of days during which the respondent-workman discharged his duties in the Department was concerned, the same could also not be disputed as the petitioner- Department had failed to produce the muster-roll to prove to the contrary and therefore, a finding was recorded that the Department had failed to prove its plea that the respondent- workman had not worked on daily wages for 240 days.
(2.) IN so far as the grant of back wages is concerned, the learned Judge of the Labour Court recorded that the respondent- workman had succeeded in proving that he was not gainfully employed else where during the period during which he was out of job and the Department neither produced any evidence to prove it otherwise nor the workman cross examined in order to demolish his plea regarding claim of back wages. The award was therefore, passed in his favour as already stated hereinbefore. The respondent-workman also succeeded in getting the award partially implemented as the Payment of Wages Authority passed an order computing his back wages and an amount of Rs. 1,11,000/- towards back waged for the period from December 1987 to August 2002 has also been paid to the respondent-workman.