BABU LAL Vs. LABOUR COURT JODHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of INdia the core question arises for consideration is what ought to be the criteria for the award of compensation in lieu of reinstatement where discharge or dismissal of a workman is held to be not legal or justified.

(2.) THE factual score which has bearing on the controversy involved are that there is a hostel in village Raniwada for the students belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe community receiving grant in aid from the Social Welfare Department of the Government of Rajasthan. Each students contributes Rs. 80/- per month for running the mess. THE petitioner workman Babu Lal was engaged as a part time Chowkidar in December, 1992 on a monthly salary of Rs. 350/- per month. He was discharged from the service on 23.3.95, by oral order of the Superintendent of the Hotel. On raising an industrial dispute the State of Rajasthan made a reference to the Labour Court as to whether the termination of the services of petitioner as part time Chowkidar w.e.f. 28.03.1995 was legal and valid. THE Labour Court after considering the evidence arrived at the conclusion that the termination of the services of the petitioner was in violation of the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to the Act of 1947). However, the Labour Court considering the fact that the petitioner was only a part time Chowkidar and he was also having an earning of Rs. 350/- per day as a labour instead of granting relief of reinstatement made an award for payment of compensation in the sum of Rs. 11,000/-.

(3.) IN Vikramaditya Pandey vs. INdustrial Tribunal & Anr. (supra) the Apex Court while upholding the order of reinstatement sliced down the back wages to the extent of 50%. The same view has been taken by the Apex Court in some of the cases referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner.