SITA RAM Vs. ASSISTANT ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- workman challenging the award dtd. 9/10/2003 passed by the learned Labour Court No.2 Jaipur, whereby though the termination of the petitioner was held to be in violation of Sec. 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act of 1947'), the relief of reinstatement was declined. The petitioner has prayed that he may be reinstated in the services with 25 percent back wages and other consequential benefits.

(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner was engaged by the respondent department as a daily wager and thereafter, his services came to be terminated without issuance of notice or payment of retrenchment compensation as contemplated under Sec. 25-F of the Act of 1947.

(3.) Thereafter, the dispute was raised and referred for adjudication before the Labour Court and upon appreciation of the pleadings and evidence, the learned Labour Court recorded a finding that the mandatory requirements of Sec. 25-F had not been complied with and, therefore, the retrenchment was illegal. However, taking into consideration the nature of engagement and other attendant circumstances, the Labour Court declined reinstatement.