The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Labour Court award that declared the retrenchment of respondent No.3 illegal, finding no cogent reason to interfere with the Labour Court's evidence-based conclusion.
The writ petition is dismissed.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS
None present for the petitioner. Mr. Narender Moolchandani, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Mr. D.K. Parihar, for respondent No.3.
None present for the petitioner.
I have perused the award dated 20.11.1989. The finding given by learned Judge, Labour Court with regard to declaring retrenchment of respondent No.3 as illegal is based upon cogent evidence and after appreciation of evidence. The respondent No.3 has produced sufficient evidence on record to prove that his services were terminated illegally. The respondent nO.3 has also produced sufficient evidence with regard to his illness and on that basis his explanation was accepted. Therefore, the finding of
2
fact does not require any interference by this Court while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is no force in the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.
(GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J.
arun
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to interfere with the Labour Court's finding that the retrenchment of respondent No.3 was illegal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Unknown Petitioner
Respondent No.3
Gopal Krishan Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
