Thu. Nov 26th, 2020

Officer Commanding vs Hari Shankar on 1 June, 2018

1 min read

2. The respondents worked with the petitioner as casual labour in
their godown/storage/watchman/kitchen and their services were
dispensed with on 31st October, 1997 whereupon the respondents
raised an industrial dispute claiming reinstatement with backwages.
The respondents claim to have worked with the petitioner for more
than ten years and have completed continuous service of 240 days in a
calendar year whereas according to the petitioner, the respondents
worked for the period 7 to 14 years as per the details given and they
had not completed continuous service of 240 days in a calendar year.
3. The Industrial Tribunal held that the respondents had completed
continuous service of 240 days. The Tribunal further held the
termination of the service of the respondents to be illegal. However,
the learned Tribunal declined the relief of reinstatement and awarded
compensation and litigation cost in lieu thereof.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply