during the currency of contract under which the employee was entitled to continue for further period upto 24.11.1988. The premature termination without notice was taken to be circumstance justifiable enough for the Labour Court to provide for compensation of 20,000/-. It is admitted by the counsel appearing on behalf of the Federation that 20,000/- had also been paid. I find that there had been initially a stay order issued on 22.07.1991 but it was later vacated. Though argument as addressed to the effect that termination from service did not amount to retrenchment and therefore, there was no requirement of compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, I will not go into that issue and I will take it that substantial justice had been done for compensating an employee who was prematurely terminated without notice of contract and it would not require to be interfered with. If the amount of ` 20,000/- has already been recovered, no further remains to be done. If it has not been so recovered, the respondent shall be entitled to secure the recovery in accordance with law. Learned counel for the respondent also states that there is also a provision for interest @12% per annum. I do not think that there is any scope for intervention in the order of Labour Court.
