1. By way of this petition, the workman has challenged the award passed by Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad in Reference (ITN) 831 of 1998 dated 13th May, 2003 whereby the claim of the workman that he should have been given promotion on the post of lineman, is rejected.
2. Heard Mr. Rathod, learned advocate for the petitioner workman and Ms. Zarna Pandya with Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, learned advocate for respondent.
3. The case of the petitioner before the labour machinery was to the effect that, he was working as a helper and one person, named Mr.K.J.Solanki, who had joined as helper after him and thus who was junior to him was promoted on the post of lineman and therefore the petitioner also ought to have been promoted. The said claim of the workman was contested on behalf of the respondent electricity company and after evaluating the evidence on record, the tribunal came to the conclusion that it was not open to the petitioner to make comparison with Mr.K.J.Solanki since seniority in the cadre of linemen is maintained circle wise and promotion is also given on the basis of circle seniority and the petitioner and Mr. Solanki both were in different circles.
4. Having heard learned advocates for parties and having gone through the record, it transpires that the finding recorded by the tribunal can not be termed as erroneous in any manner and therefore no interference is called for by this Court. I see any reason to interfere with the view taken by the tribunal.
5. This petition does not have any force, the same is required to be dismissed and is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
amit (PARESH UPADHYAY, J.)