JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)The writ petition challenges the ex parte award passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak, answering a reference whether the termination of services of Smt. Asha Kumari was justified or not. In the absence of any appearance on behalf of the management, the Labour Court proceeded to dispose of the case on the solitary statement of the workman that she had been employed on a temporary post on 30.04.1992 and the termination was effected by the Chairman on 15.07.1992. The order of reinstatement with back wages had been made by reference also to the statement made on behalf of the workman that after her removal Smt. Sunita Devi, Om Wati and Sushila Devi had been appointed. The Labour Court had therefore observed that the workman was entitled to be reinstated. Such a direction appears to be non-sequeter. If there was a person who had been appointed subsequently and therefore the workman was trying to urge for a right of re-employment under Section. 25-H, it could not have been done by a dispute raised at the instance of a workman under Section 2-A. Section 25-H contemplates a fresh employment is not a case of reinstatement. If there was a direction, the reinstatement ought to have been on the ground that the termination was bad. As a matter of fact, the reference itself was for an adjudication whether the termination was justified or not. A direction made for reinstatement without a finding whether the termination was bad or not itself vitiates the award. If the Labour Court, by directing reinstatement assumed that it was providing for re-employment under Section 25-H, again it was beyond the jurisdiction and the scope of reference. The award of the Labour Court, under the circumstances, is set aside and remitted to the Labour Court again for consideration of the whole matter after receiving the statement from the management.
(2.)It is represented by the counsel for the petitioner that the workman has been reinstated subsequently pursuant to the order and she has been working. By virtue of the order of the Labour Court being set aside, the right of the workman will be decided afresh by adjudicating on the merits of the contention after receiving the objection that may be filed on behalf of the management.
(3.)The order of the Labour Court is set aside and the writ petition is disposed of as above.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.