Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

SABINA, J Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari challenging the award dated 05.01.1993 (Annexure P-1).

Respondent No.1 had raised an Industrial dispute by serving a demand notice challenging his termination. The said dispute raised by respondent no.1 was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak by the appropriate Government.

The case of respondent No.1, in brief, was that he was appointed as Octroi Moharar on 31.03.1988 and his services had been terminated on 31.12.1988 without complying with the mandatory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('Act' for short).

1 of 6 Petitioner-Management, in its written statement, averred that respondent No.1 was working with it on daily wage basis. Deputy Commissioner had appointed six Octroi Moharars for six months and the services of the said persons were terminated on completion of the said period as the vacancies were filled up through employment exchange.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court:-

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent No.1 had worked with the petitioner- Management on daily wage basis. Learned counsel has further submitted that respondent No.1 had not worked for 240 days with the petitioner-Management and Section 25F of the Act was not applicable to the facts of the present case. Learned counsel has further submitted that the posts of Octroi Moharar were abolished in the year 1999. Hence, it was not 2 of 6 possible for the petitioner-Management to reinstate respondent No.1 as no post was available.

The question that requires consideration is that as respondent No.1 had worked with the petitioner-Management from 31.03.1988 to 31.12.1988 on daily wage basis with breaks, whether he is entitled for reinstatement in service especially in view of the stand taken by the petitioner- Management that no post was available for reinstatement of respondent No.1. It is the case of the petitioner-Management that post of Octroi Moharar has since been abolished.

In the case of Municipal Council, Dina Nagar, Tehsil 3 of 6 & Distt. Gurdaspur Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur and another, 2014(4) S.C.T. 514, the Full Bench of this Court has laid down the following principles:-