STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. GAJANAND SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have preferred this writ petition against the impugned award dated 08.12.2000 (Annexure/1) passed by th learned labour Court, Bikaner, whereby while adjudicating the reference made by the appropriate Government, the learned labour Court has found that the retrenchment of the respondent -workman is bad in law, as the same is in gross violation of the mandatory provisions contained under Section 25 F,G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1947). While concluding that retrenchment of the respondent workman is bad in law, the learned labour Court has set aside the retrenchment of the workman with effect from 31.8.1984 and ordered his reinstatement in the services of the petitioners, without backwages however, the services of the respondent - workman were treated to be continued.

(2.) THE petitioners in the writ petition have inter alia averred that at the threshold, the respondent -workman was engaged as Pump Driver in the month of March, 1983 and he continuously remained in the employment up to August, 1984. As per the version of the petitioners, on 23.7.1984 the workman was served with one month's notice and on expiry of the same, his services came to an end on 23.8.1984. It was further averred that at the time of retrenchment, the respondent -workman was offered the requisite amount of retrenchment compensation. The learned labour Court on evaluation of evidence and other materials on record has found that retrenchment of the respondent -workman was not affected in adherence of the mandatory provisions of the Act of 1947, and as such, the same is bad in law.

(3.) IT is stated at bar by learned counsel for the rival parties that the due compliance is being made on the said order of the Court under Section 17 -B of the Act of 1947.