1. Heard learned advocate Mr. T. R. Mishra for the petitioner.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Mishra has submitted that before the impugned order came to be passed, the petitioner was declared as a protected workman. He also submitted that during the period in question, though the petitioner was a protected workman, his service was sought to be terminated.
3. A permission application being Permission Application no.1 of 2011 came to be filed seeking permission of the court to terminate present petitioner.
4. He also submitted that the petitioner was served with intimation/order dated 14/03/2011 (page-66) whereby he was informed that during the pendency of the permission application the petitioner would be paid appropriate subsistence allowance.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Mishra submitted that since the date of the said order i.e. 14/03/2011 the petitioner is not allowed to report for duty and he is treated as having been terminated and though permission application is pending he has not been paid any allowance as mentioned in the order dated 14/03/2011.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Mishra submitted that since the date of the said order dated 14/03/2011 until now any action has not been taken to pay the subsistence allowance. He also submitted that in this view of the matter, the petitioner requested the labour court to reject the permission application since it would not be maintainable on account of respondent employer's default in the matter of payment of subsistence allowance. However by impugned order dated 07/01/2012 the said application has been dismissed.
7. In view of above, the office is directed to issue notice making the same returnable on 31/01/2012. Direct service is permitted.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) (ila) Top