The State of Haryana and Another vs The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Panipat and Another

Rajesh Bindal, J.—Challenge in the present petition filed by the State is to the award dated 19.10.2005, passed by Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Panipat (for short, ''the Tribunal''), whereby the claim made by the respondent-workman was allowed. She was directed to be reinstated with continuity of service and back wages from the date of demand notice. The respondent-workman in the present case was working as Safai Karamchari on part-time basis. On 15.1.2007, when the petition came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this court, it was adjourned to await the decision of CWP No. 4660 of 1999-Gobind v. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jalandhar and another, which was pending consideration before a Full Bench of this Court. After the decision of the Full Bench on 22.5.2008, the matter was directed to be listed.

A perusal of the judgment of Full Bench of this court in Gobind''s case (supra) shows that though the employees working on part-time basis have been held to be workmen, but their nature of employment has been held to be contractual and employer at liberty to terminate the services. They are held not entitled to the benefits under the provisions of Chapters VA and VB of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ''the Act''). In the present case, the Tribunal held that there was violation of the provisions of Section 25F of the Act, which is forming part of Chapter VA.

Considering the enunciation of law, as laid down in the aforesaid judgment of this court, the award of the Tribunal deserves to be set aside as the respondent-workman in the present case is not entitled to the benefits of Section 25F of the Act. Ordered accordingly. The petition stands disposed of.