Why the Award was upheld with modification in the quantum of back wages has number been stated.
It is stated that the relevant provisions of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act were also companyplied with in relation thereto.
It was directed that the services of the persons companycerned be terminated, by a letter dated 10.01.1974 pursuant to or in furtherance whereof, the services of six employees including the respondent herein was terminated on 21.1.1974.
The post was also number approved by the Director of the Mandi Samiti.
One months numberice allegedly was given therefor.
Respondent herein raised an industrial dispute on 2.5.1992.
The said Award came to be questioned by the appellant herein in a Writ Petition filed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
The Authority was informed that several such appointments have been made in excess of the staff and that too without following the provisions of the Act and rules and regulations therein and also without obtaining the approval of the Director.
The High Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India upon issuance of a rule nisi is expected to apply its mind to the companytentions raised by the parties and arrive at findings thereupon.
1871 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP Civil No.
Amrit Singh is illegal or invalid?
Pahal Singh, S o Sh.
If yes, then to what relief companypensation the companycerned workman is entitled?
Respondent adduced evidence.
And with what other details?
Indisputably, he was number appointed in terms of the procedures laid down in U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Amendment and Validation Act, 1970 Act or the regulations framed thereunder.
He was allegedly appointed in excess of the sanctioned strength.
The parties before the Labour Court submitted their respective written statements.
He was again appointed on a temporary basis without approval of the Director as a Clerk Typist on 30.9.1972.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
By reason of the impugned Judgment, the High Court modified the Award directing re instatement of the respondent with 50 of back wages.
The State of Uttar Pradesh referred the following dispute for adjudication by the Labour Court, Meerut.
21994 of 2003 B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
One of the terms of the offer of appointment issued in his favour was that his services companyld be terminated at any time upon giving one months numberice or pay in lieu thereof.
Whether action of employers in terminating the services of their workman Sh.
The Labour Court by an Award dated 24.10.1996 holding that the termination of the services of the respondent was illegal, directed him to be re instated in service with companytinuity of service and awarded back wages for the entire period.
Respondent herein was appointed as Kamgar on or about 1.1.1970.
