JUDGMENT

A.K. Sikri, J.

1. The respondent No. 3/Mr.Ramaji (hereinafter referred to as the workman') was working with the petitioner (hereinafter called as `the management') as Turner. According to him, he was employed on 2nd November, 1978. He approached the Conciliation Officer alleging that he was refused duty by the management which tantamounted to termination of his services. As the conciliation proceedings ended in failure, following reference was made by the Secretary (Labour), Delhi Administration to the Labour Court No. VII for adjudication:

"Whether the management refused duty to the workman and whether this tantamounts to termination of service. If so whether the termination is illegal and unjustified what directions are necessary in this respect?"

2. After adjudicating the dispute, the learned Labour Court vide its award dated 17th February, 1990 held that termination of the workman's services was bad in law. However, for reasons stated in the award, the Labour Court declined to grant back-wages and thus held that the workman was entitled to be reinstated with continuity of service but without any wages.

3. This writ petition has been filed by the management challe