The witness produced by the appellant stated that the respondent stopped companying to work from February, 1988.
While this practice was going on, the State Government by its order dated 17.10.1988, directed all the departments of the State Government to discontinue the practice of engaging the services of daily wage workmen and in lieu of it to hire labourers on companytractual basis.
The documentary evidence produced by the appellant is companytradictory to this fact as it shows that the respondent was working during February, 1989 also.
The activities of F.T.D. inter alia companysisted of providing landing facilities for catching fish in a clean and hygienic companydition and for that purpose, services of daily wage workmen were utilized as and when it was needed.
The appellants have inexplicably failed to produce the companyplete records and muster rolls from 1985 to 1991, inspite of the direction issued by the labour companyrt to produce the same.
By the impugned judgment, the companyrt has affirmed the award passed by the labour companyrt, Junagadh, in Reference Case No.
The facts in brief are The Fisheries Terminal Department T.D. for short , the appellant herein, had companye into existence sometime in the year 1976.
L. Dattu,J. Leave granted.
This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the Gujarat High Court in S.C.A. No.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court, the appellant is before us in this appeal.
29355 of 2007 dated 30.11.2007.
The award passed by the labour companyrt was challenged by the appellant before the High Court.
192 of 1995 dated 14th May, 2007, wherein and whereunder the labour companyrt has directed the employer to reinstate the workman into service with 20 back wages.
It is the companytention of the appellant that the services of the respondent were terminated in 1988.
