1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 31.03.2010 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Surendranagar in ID Complain No. 4 of 1995, whereby the said complaint was allowed and the petitioners were directed to reinstate the respondent workman in service.
2. The facts in brief are that the respondent workman was serving as a Chokidar since last fourteen years with the petitioner department. It is the case of the respondent workman that the petitioner relieved the workman from the service w.e.f. 21.01.1995 without any notice. The respondent workman therefore, filed Reference Case No. 233/1993, which is pending before the Court below. Along with the Reference, the respondent workman also filed Recovery Application, which is also pending. It is the case of the respondent workman that since no notice for retrenchment was issued, the respondent workman filed complaint u/s. 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Court below. The Court below after hearing the parties, allowed the complaint by passing the impugned order. Hence, this petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents on record. It appears from the record that before the respondent workman was retrenched from the services, Reference filed by the respondent workman against the petitioner department was pending. It also appears that the proceedings initiated under the Payment of Services Act were also pending before the competent Court. During the pendency of the above proceedings, the petitioner department retrenched the respondent workman from the service w.e.f. 21.01.1995. In my opinion the petitioner State ought not to have retrenched the respondent workman when the disputes were pending before the competent Court. Therefore, there was clear breach of provisions of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
4. Considering the facts of the case, I am of the view that the Court below was completely justified in passing the impugned award. I am in complete agreement with the reasoning given by the Labour Court while passing the impugned order and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same.
5. Consequently, the petition is dismissed.
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/ Top