The following reference was made for adjudication before the Labour Court Whether the termination of service by the employer of their workman Ram Nayak from 1st June 1990 was bad or invalid.
However, the service of the appellant was terminated by an oral order for which the reference was made.
The Labour Court, after companysidering, both the oral and the documentary evidence on record, held that the oral termination order was bad and, therefore, directed re instatement of the appellant in the Corporation with companytinuity of service and back wages.
The said reference came to be registered as Adjudication Dispute No.89 of 1994 before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Varanasi, P. The appellant claimed that he was working under the erstwhile Ratna Sugar Mills on the appointed day under the U.P. Sugar Undertaking Acquisition Act, 1971 hereinafter referred to as the Acquisition Act .
This award was challenged by the Corporation before the High Court by way of a writ petition.
This appeal, by grant of special leave, is directed against the final judgment and order dated 10th July, 2006 passed by the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.5385 of 1998 whereby the High Court had allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent and set aside the award dated 5th June, 1997 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Varanasi, U.P. in Adjudication Dispute No.89 of 1994 directing re instatement of the appellant with companytinuity of service and payment of full back wages by the respondent U.P. State Sugar Corporation for short the Corporation .
TARUN CHATTERJEE,J. Leave granted.
On and from 24/4/1989, Ratna Sugar Mills had vested with the Corporation as the said date was the appointed day under Section 2 A of the Acquisition Act.
