Raj Kumar vs The Shahbad Co-operative Sugar Mills Limited and Another

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.—The workman has filed the instant writ petition challenging the Award dated 28.8.1998 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Labour Court, Ambala, whereby while deciding the reference against the workman it was held that there was no illegality in terminating the services of the workman. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

In this case it has not been disputed that the workman was engaged by the management as seasonal workman. He was appointed on 30.11.1986 as seasonal clerk on daily wages and after completion of the crushing season his services were dispensed with on 20.5.1987. In view of the said undisputed factual position and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Morinda Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Ram Krishan and others etc., , the Labour Court held that termination of services of the petitioner being seasonal workman at the end of the season does not fall under the definition of ''retrenchment'' as defined u/s 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, therefore, the management was not required to comply with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act. With regard to another obligation of the management to engage such workers in the next season, it has been argued by the learned counsel for the management that in the next season the workman never approached the management for re-engagement as he had committed bungling during his previous engagement, and in a preliminary enquiry he was found guilty. Therefore, due to apprehension that adverse action may not be taken against him on that enquiry he did not approach for re-engagement.

During the course of hearing, it has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the workman never approached the management for re-engagement. No such plea was either taken by the workman in the claim statement or in the statement made by him before the Labour Court. In view of the fact that the workman never approached the management for re-engagement, he cannot be granted any relief with regard to second liability of the management to re-engage such workers in the next season. In view of this factual and legal position, I do not find any illegality in the impugned award passed by the Labour Court. No merits. Dismissed.