TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than to direct his reinstatement with all consequential benefits. Having regard to the peculiar nature of the respondent's appointment and rendering of services by him for a very short duration (just 240 days only) and with no evidence as to whether he worked for gains or not after his services came to an end in 1977, this was a fit case where the Labour Court should have awarded lump sum compensation to the respondent instead of directing his reinstatement in service with consequential benefits. The Labour Court was empowered to pass such order by taking recourse to the powers under Section 11A of the Act. This has also been the view of this Court in such type of cases. While modifying the impugned order and the award of the Labour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erence on merits before the Labour Court. By award dated 21.09.1988, the Labour Court answered the Reference in respondent's favour. 7. It was held that termination of the respondent was not legal and proper and, therefore, it was liable to be set aside. It was accordingly set aside. It was also held that the respondent be reinstated in service by the appellant and he be given continuity in service, also. 8. The appellant (employercompany) felt aggrieved and filed writ petition in the High Court. By an order dated 17.09.1997, the High Court (Single Judge) allowed the writ petition and set aside the award of the Labour Court. 9. The respondent (employee) felt aggrieved and filed intra court appeal before the Division Bench. By i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than to direct his reinstatement with all consequential benefits. 15. In other words, having regard to the peculiar nature of the respondent's appointment and rendering of services by him for a very short duration (just 240 days only) and with no evidence as to whether he worked for gains or not after his services came to an end in 1977, this was a fit case where the Labour Court should have awarded lump sum compensation to the respondent instead of directing his reinstatement in service with consequential benefits. The Labour Court was empowered to pass such order by taking recourse to the powers under Section 11A of the Act. This has also been the view of this Court in such type of cases. (SeeSenior Superintendent Telegraph (Traffi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
