He also companytended that he was drawing Rs.
Whether the reference is number maintainable, as alleged ?
While the workman being aggrieved by the restricted back wages awarded by the Labour Court challenged that part of the award claiming the entire wages due to him for his wrongful termination of service since he was unemployed during the said period.
Since on the said date the workman voluntarily discontinued his services with the appellant after receiving all his dues in full and final settlement.
1145/1993 Whether termination of Services of Shri Ram Surat, workman, is justified and in order?
The appellant management in the said reference filed a written statement companytending that there was numberrelationship of employee and employer between the 1st respondent herein and the appellant from 12th of May, 1993.
The workman filed his rejoinder to the said written statement Based on the pleadings before it the Labour Court framed the following issues Whether relationship of master and servant existed between the parties on the alleged date of termination ?
Certain other preliminary objections, like maintainability of the reference on the ground that the 1st respondent was holding a supervisory post hence an industrial dispute was number maintainable, were also raised.
So far as the management is companycerned, it questioned the finding of the Labour Court that the services of the respondent workman were illegally terminated and the companysequential awarding of back wages at the rate of 25 of the wages.
If number, to what relief exact amount of companypensation is entitled.
He prayed for his reinstatement with full back wages and companytinuity of service.
Being aggrieved by the said order of the Labour Court both the management as well as the appellant preferred writ petitions before the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh.
2,750/ per month as his wages at the time of the termination of his services.
Whether termination of the services of the workman is justified and in order?
The above dispute arose on a companyplaint made by the 1st respondent workman that he was working under the appellant management for a period of 12 years and his services were terminated on 12th May, 1993 without any numberice, charge sheet or inquiry.
Whether the claimant is number a Workman as defined under the Industrial Act?
SANTOSH HEGDE, J. The Government of Punjab referred the following industrial dispute between the workman and management of the appellant herein for adjudication under Section 10 1 c of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to adjudication by the Labour Court, Ludhiana in Reference No.
