9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 443X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regular appointment having worked with the appellant-Corporation on ad hoc basis. Her services were extended from time to time. In each of the offer of appointment, indisputably, similar terms and conditions were laid down. The details of such appointments are as under : "Sl. No. Period Working days 1. 13.2.91 to 12.5.91 89 2. 14.5.91 to 10.8.91 89 3. 13.8.91 to 9.11.91 89 4. 11.11.91 to 7.2.92 89" It is not in dispute that she remained absent for 19 days during the period 20th January, 1992 and 7th February, 1992 as also for a period of 11 days during the period 17.3.1992 to 27.3.1992. Her services were terminated on 7.8.1992. She raised an industrial dispute, whereupon the State of Punjab in exercise of its power under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected to be regularized in the light of the judgments of this Court and furthermore in view of the fact that her appointment had been for a fixed period of 89 days, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. Mr. Ranvir Singh Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on the other hand, urged that the respondent having completed 240 days of service within a period of twelve months preceding the date of her termination and in view of the fact that no compensation had been paid as provided in Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act; the Labour Court and consequently the High Court has rightly directed her reinstatement with full back wages. Section 2 (oo) (bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act reads as under:- & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... she was re-appointed after a gap of one or two days. In that view of the matter, the Labour Court or the High Court cannot be said to have committed any illegality. In this case the services of the respondent had been terminated on a regular basis and she had been re-appointed after a gap of one or two days. Such a course of action was adopted by the Appellant with a view to defeat the object of the Act. Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, therefore, is not attracted in the instant case. However, indisputably, the respondent was appointed on an ad hoc basis. She, although qualified to hold the post of Junior Technician, when the advertisement had been issued for filling up the said post, did not apply therefor. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Court to mould relief in a given situation. The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to the proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act. Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act empowers the Labour Court, Tribunal and National Tribunal to give appropriate relief in case of discharge or dismissal of workmen." It was further opined: "Industrial Courts while adjudicating on disputes between the management and the workmen, therefore, must take such decisions which would be in consonance with the purpose the law seeks to achieve. When justice is the buzzword in the matter of adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act, it would be wholly improper on the part of the superior co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nds of justice if the respondent is paid 50% of the back wages till the date of reinstatement" This Court held: "It is not in dispute that the respondent did not raise any plea in his written statement that he was not gainfully employed during the said period. It is now well-settled by various decisions of this Court that although earlier this Court insisted that it was for the employer to raise the aforementioned plea but having regard to the provisions of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act or the provisions analogous thereto, such a plea should be raised by the workman." [See also Haryana State Agriculatural MarketingBoard v. Subhash Chand & Anr. (2006) 2 SCC 794]. In Nagar Mahapali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
