GOPI RAM Vs. JUDGE, LABOUR COURT NO 1

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition claiming following reliefs:- ...[VARNACULAR TEXT UMIITED]...

(2.) The petitioner was appointed on the post of daily wage cattle guard on 1.7.1986 and he claimed that he remained in service upto November 1992 when his services was unlawfully brought to an end. The matter was referred to the labour Court after unsuccessful conciliation proceedings and the labour Court has passed an order against the workman-petitioner on 26.12.2000 primarily on the ground that the petitioner was unable to prove 240 days regular employment preceding service coming to an end.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner Shri M.F.Baig has submitted that there was an application for calling for the muster rolls which would have categorically answered the question of the learned Court below regarding the continuity of the services of the petitioner for 240 days preferred on 18.11.2005 and it is on record of page No.45 of paper book. Counsel for the petitioner further submitted before this Court that the application was allowed vide order dated 5.3.2009 passed by the learned labour Court but in spite of calling of the muster rolls, the respondents could not bring it on record and filed an affidavit that the same was not available with them. Counsel for the petitioner submits that when such stand has been taken by the respondents that they could not produce the muster rolls, then it is to be adversely inferred against the employer. To support his submission, the Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Gauri Shanker Vs. State of Rajasthan- (2015) 12 Supreme Court cases 754. Relevant para 20 is reproduced as under: -