STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. BHANWAR LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the outset, it is relevant to mention that the present is a matter wherein specific concealments and incorrect statements have been made on oath by the respondent-workman before learned Labour Court as well as this Court. On the same hand, it is also a case of serious lacunas on behalf of the petitionerDepartment.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as under :

(3.) The respondent-workman preferred a claim petition before the Labour Court with the avements that he was appointed as Attendant (Class IV employee) with the respondent-Department on 14/1/1977 and continued to work as such till the year 1994. In the year 1994, he went on leave for a week due to his medical conditions and remained on leave till 8/9/1994. On 9/9/1994, he marked his presence back on duty. But just to harass him, a sudden inspection was made by the Director wherein he was reported to be absent from duties and therefore, was suspended vide order dtd. 26/9/1994. Subsequently, the said suspension order was revoked vide order dtd. 20/10/1995 and the respondent-workman was held entitled for all consequential benefits. During his suspension period, due to duress, he preferred an application which was accepted dehors the rules and his services were terminated w.e.f. 14/8/1995. The said termination was challenged on the ground of the same being in contravention to Rule 25F and N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act of 1947-).