MAHAVEER CONDUCTOR Vs. NAND KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel Mr. Vyas appears for all the respondents. Thus, the service is complete. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of finally. This writ petition has been filed against the award of the Labour Court dated 12.1.1999 by which the claim of the respondents-workmen has been allowed and in lieu of reinstatement, a compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,000.00 to Nand Kishore, 5000.00 to Kishan Lal, 9,000.00 to Bikha Ram, and Rs. 5,500.00 to Arjun Singh has been awarded.

(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that on application of the respondents-workmen, the appropriate Government Vide order dated 2.2.1993 made a reference to the Labour Court as to whether the termination of the respondents-workmen from service was in accordance with law and if not to what relief they were entitled for. In pursuance thereof, the workmen filed the claim petitions submitting that they had worked for a long period but their services had been terminated without complying with the provisions of Sec. 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called as the Act, 1947). The reply was filed by the Management-the present petitioner contending that the establishment itself stood closed on 17.7.1991, therefore, the question of their termination of services was under compulsion. More so, they had not worked for 240 days in a calendar year counting backwards from the date of termination. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence, the learned Labour Court recorded the findings of fact that the workmen had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year counting backwards from the date of termination, but as the Establishment was closed, the workmen could not have continued. However, it in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Labour Court came to the conclusion that even if the establishment stood closed, the services of the employees could have been terminated in accordance with law and they were entitled at least for notice and some compensation and thus awarded the compensation as stated herein above. Hence this petition.

(3.) Shri Shankhla, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that as the reference itself was made without mentioning a date of termination how the award impugned could be held valid and there is no sanctity of an award on a reference which itself is bad. There can be no dispute to the settled legal proposition that any order passed by any Court without jurisdiction is nullity and such order remains inexecutable and unenforceable.