High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
State Of U.P.& Another v. Labour Court, Allahabad & Another - WRIT - C No. 11414 of 1988  RD-AH 11547 (9 July 2007)
Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala, J.
Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioner.
List has been revised. No one appears for the respondent workman.
From the record it transpires that the workman was appointed with effect from 1.5.1977 and was removed from service from 16.5.1985 without complying with the provisions of Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court has given a categorical finding of fact that the workman had worked for more than 240 days in a calender year and therefore, the provisions of Section 6-N was required to be complied with by the employers before dispensing the services of the workman. Since this had not been done, the order of termination was illegal and against the provisions of Section 6-N. The Labour Court consequently awarded reinstatement with back wages. In my opinion, the findings arrived at is based on findings of fact which cannot be interfered in a writ jurisdiction. In my opinion, the award of the Labour Court does not suffer from any error of law.
The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.