Chauth Mal Meena Son of Shri Bhenru Lal Meena Vs Block Development Officer

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in only awarding compensation to the appellant to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/-. In fact, appellant was entitled for reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits.

¶16

Appellant was working with the respondent as Watchman and had worked from 01.09.1986 till 30.11.1989. However, appellant raised industrial dispute after a period of 10 years. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Labour Court rightly held that the appellant was not entitled for

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[SAW-745/2019]

¶19

reinstatement in service, but was entitled to receive compensation in lieu of reinstatement. The compensation amount awarded by the Labour Court was Rs. 70,000/- and the same was enhanced to Rs. 1,50,000/- by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 13.03.2019.

¶20

The amount of compensation awarded by the learned Single Judge seems to be just and fair, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Hence, no ground for interference is made out.

¶21

Dismissed.

¶22

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶23

(SABINA),J

¶24

Gourav/Jatin /11

Chauth Mal Meena Son of Shri Bhenru Lal Meena v. Block Development Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chauth Mal Meena Son of Shri Bhenru Lal Meena v. Block Development Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aam Janata Vs Mr. Shri Avichal Chaturvedi District Collector Dausa

Mr. Ranveer Singh S/O Shri Bhanwar Singh Vs Mr. Sudarshan Sethi

Padam Chand Jain S/O Late Shri Johri Lal Jain Vs Union of India

Leela and Ors. Vs State

School of Aeronautics Vs Union of India

Vimal Chaudhary S/O Shri Chuttan Lal Chaudhary Vs Manjeet Singh