PRINCIPAL MAYO COLLEGE Vs. LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the award dated 21st October 1986, annexure 17, passed by the learned Labour Court, whereby the order of termination terminating the services of Bhanwar Singh, respondent No. 2, dated 13th August 1983, annexure 10, was set aside and he was reinstated with back wages.

(2.) PUT briefly, the facts of the case are that respondent No. 2, Bhanwar Singh, was employed as a probationer in the Mayo College, Ajmer, as class IV employee to fill the post of Chowkidar, vide order No. 1049 dated 11th December 1981, for a period of two years with effect from 1st January, 1982. Prior to this, Bhanwar Singh was kept on trial for a period of six months in place of his father. The case of the petitioner is that as Bhanwar Singh was not found suitable to be kept in the employment on permanent basis, due to his unsatisfactory work, his services were terminated, vide office order dated 13th August 1983, with effect from 30th September 1983, i. e. , his services were terminated before the expiry of the probationary period. Aggrieved by the order of termination, Bhanwar Singh raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer, Ajmer. As no settlement could be arrived at, the Conciliation Officer submitted his failure report to the Government. The Government referred the case for adjudication to the Labour Court. Before the Labour Court, Bhanwar Singh filed his statement of claim contending that his services were illegally terminated. He further submitted that his work was satisfactory and that his services were terminated without any inquiry. Bhanwar Singh also contended that he was not given any notice and compensation in terms of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the Act" ). The case before the Labour Court was resisted on behalf of the petitioner and it has averred that the reference was bad in law as services of Bhanwar Singh were terminated as per the service conditions of probationers and in terminating the services no illegality was committed which could give rise to an industrial dispute between Bhanwar Singh and the petitioner. It was also reiterated that the services of Bhanwar Singh were terminated because his work during the probationary period was not satisfactory. Before the Labour Court, Bhanwar Singh examined himself and on behalf of Mayo College, Ajmer, besides the Principal, who is the petitioner in this writ petition, three more witnesses were examined. The Labour Court, after considering the entire matter by its award dated 21st October 1986, annexure 17, held that the termination of the services of Bhanwar Singh was illegal and unjust and he was directed to be reinstated with full back wages. Aggrieved by the award dated 21st October 1986, passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner has challenged the award and the order of reference, annexure 1, through this writ petition.

(3.) THE main ground urged by Shri Manoj Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, is that the case of Bhanwar Singh is covered by the exception to Clause (bb) of Section 2 (00) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in as much as there was a stipulation in the service rules for classes III and IV staff of the Mayo College that the services of such employees could be terminated during the probationary period without assigning any reason, with one month's notice. The petitioner, in the instant case, had served a notice, annexure 10, which was for more than one month, by which the services of the petitioner were terminated with effect from 30th September, 1983.