STATE AND OTHERS Vs. GIRIRAJ PRASAD AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) According to the facts of the case, initially the Respondent No. 1 was engaged as part time Class IV employee on 25.1.1991 at Primary Health Centre, Mal and his services were retrenched without following the provisions of Sec. 25 -F(a) and (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Respondent No. 1 raised an industrial dispute before the conciliation officer and after failure of the conciliation proceedings, the matter was referred to the appropriate Government for making reference. The appropriate Government referred the matter to the Judge, Labour Court, Udaipur for adjudication, which reads as under: ...[VERNACULAR TEXT COMITTED]...

(3.) Before the Judge, Labour Court, the Respondent No. 1 filed his statement of claim in which it is categorically stated by him that he worked with the Respondent Department for more than 240 days, therefore, before terminating his services, the Respondents were under obligation to comply with the provisions of Sec. 25 -F(a) and (b) of the Act which is not complied with by the Respondent. Therefore, his retrenchment is illegal.