Petitioner challenged rejection of regularization claim. Court held that final Labour Court award established continuous employment from 1989 to 2000, making the rejection arbitrary. Petition allowed; regularization reconsidered.
Impugned order set aside. Respondents directed to reconsider regularization within 90 days based on Labour Court award.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 8514 of 2018
Bhola Ram S/o Shri Makhan Singh Aged About 50 Years Working At Kusumkasa Parisar, Forest Rang Office Dallirajhara, District Balod Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate For State : Mr. R.N. Pusty, Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
04/01/2019
2
3
the petitioner in accordance with the findings of the Labour Court has to be presumed to be in continuous employment right from 1989 onwards.
7 . The said view stands fortified by the judgment of this Court in the case of “ Tukaram v. State of Chhattisgarh” WPS No. 1703/2015 , decided on 16.05.2017. Once when there is a categorical finding of the Labour Court, the authorities in the department cannot, unless the award is set-aside, sit over the finding of the Labour Court and take a different view. Once when there is an order of holding the petitioner to be in continuous employment from 1989 onwards, the authorities have to presume the fact that the petitioner is in continuous employment from 1989 till 1997. Thus, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the finding of the authority while rejecting the claim for regularization of the petitioner to be bad in law.
10. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed off.
(P. Sam Koshy) Judge
Ved
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regularization in service despite a gap in employment claimed by the administration.
Whether the High Court can stay a Labour Court award that has attained finality and not been challenged.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tukaram v. State of ChhattisgarhFollowed¶7
Tukaram v. State of Chhattisgarh, WPS No. 1703/2015
Labour Court Award CaseRelied on¶4
case No. 14/I.D.Act/Reference/2000
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhola Ram
State Of Chhattisgarh
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
