Remanded

Yashwant Singh v. M D Rural Industrial andANR

Rajasthan HC12 Jul 2017CW/6866/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court set aside Labour Court order dismissing workman's challenge to dismissal on fixed term completion. Court directed remand to re-examine evidence of continuous service shown by attendance registers proving regularisation. Workman argued dismissal violated statutory requirements given unbroken service record. Order remanded for fresh consideration within six months.

What did the court decide?

Award dated 17.02.2016 set aside; matter remanded to Labour Court Jaipur to re-examine reference within six months.

Yashwant Singh Vs M D Rural Industrial andANR — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6866 / 2016

¶3

Yashwant Singh S/o Shri Malaram, by Caste Chamar (SC), Aged About 45 Years, Village & Post Keharpura Kalan Via Sultana, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Manager, District Rural Industrial Training and Crafts Development Centre, I.T.I. Premises, Banipark, Jaipur

¶7

Director (Training), Directorate of Technical Education Govt of Rajasthan, Jodhpur

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.D.Agnihotri.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order

¶11

12/07/2017

¶12

(1) The award dated 17.02.2016 has been assailed by the petitioner-workman as the reference has been answered against him on the ground that he was appointed not on temporary basis but on fixed term basis. The labour Court has reached to a finding that by each independent order the appointment was granted to the petitioner for a fixed term, lastly he was appointed for the period from 03.4.1997 to 19.04.1997.

¶13

(2) Taking the same as an appointment made on fixed term basis, the removal w.e.f. 20.04.1997 has been considered as under Section 2 (oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the removal on completion of the period has been held would not not attract Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[CW-6866/2016]

¶16

(3) Learned Counsel for the petitioner however, has placed on record documents Annexure-4 and Annexure-7 to show that the petitioner was working as Instructor and marking attendance of the students. Attendance register has been placed to show that he has marked attendance since June, 1995 continuously and even has worked upto March, 2008. Apparently, this aspect has not been considered by the labour Court.

¶17

(4) In view of the documents which have been placed before this Court, it is deemed just and proper to remand the matter back to the labour Court, Jaipur to re-examine the reference. The petitioner is directed to place the relevant documents before the labour Court. The award dated 17.02.2016 is set aside with direction to the labour Court to re-examine the reference in light of the documents which have been placed on affidavit before this Court and further with direction to the respondents to make available the record of the case. The matter be decided within a period of six months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.

¶18

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)J.

¶19

N.Gandhi/58

Yashwant Singh v. M D Rural Industrial andANR

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashwant Singh v. M D Rural Industrial andANR

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aslam Khan Vs Nanak Chand Vashishth

Rishi Lal Chhabara Vs Prem Kumar Mehta

Ramlal Punia and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Dharampal Gurjar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Poonam Khandelwal Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Pushpendra Vs State of Rajasthan through P P