SUBHASH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner is challenging an order, passed in the year, 1988, whereby, his services were terminated. The petitioner is also praying for salary for the past period.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents submitted that the petition is filed at a much belated stage and there is no explanation for the delay and, therefore, this writ petition may not be entertained by this Court. Secondly, the concerned Division where the petitioner was working has been closed down, as per the supplementary counter affidavit, especially paragraph no. 4 of the affidavit, filed by the respondents. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that for payment of wages, there is a separate Act, namely, Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and there is an appellate provision also under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. Otherwise also, under Section 33 -C of the Industrial Disputes Act, for all such types of benefits, application can be preferred. The petitioner is claiming reinstatement with back wages, which also cannot be given in a writ jurisdiction. Therefore, this writ petition is not tenable on law and hence, the same deserved to be dismissed.

(3.) AS a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and reasons, there is no substance in this writ petition and, hence, the same is hereby dismissed.