JUDGMENT :

Mohammed, J.—The central question involved in this writ appeal is whether the termination of service of the appellant-workman by the respondent-Management would amount to 'retrenchment' coming within the meaning of the said term defined in Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act').

2. By Ext. P 13 award passed by the Labour Court, Ernakulam on May 14, 1991 it was found that the termination of service of the workman did not amount to 'retrenchment' and hence he was not entitled to be reinstated with or without backwages or to any other relief. This award was challenged by the workman in O.P. No. 7153 of 1992. The learned single Judge after hearing found that the second respondent - Management had terminated the service of the workman under Clause 21(c) of the Certified Standing Orders for the reason that he unauthorisedly absented himself from duty and hence termination was not illegal. Challenging the above conclusion of the learned single Judge the present writ appeal has been filed by the workman.

3. The facts in brief are stated hereunder: The appellant-workman was employed as piece-worker in the Finishing Department of the Management with