SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SABINA
D. A. V. College – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Kanwar Pahul Singh.

JUDGMENT :

SABINA, J.

1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the award dated 01.03.2016 (Annexure P-6).

2. Respondent No. 2 had raised an Industrial dispute challenging his termination by serving a demand notice. The said dispute raised by respondent No. 2 was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Amritsar by the appropriate Government.

3. The case of respondent No. 2, in brief, was that he was employed as a Security Guard with the petitioner-Management on 12.06.2009. However, services of respondent No. 2 were terminated on 18.04.2011 without complying with the mandatory provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act for short).

4. The case of the petitioner-Management, on the other hand, was that respondent No. 2 had worked with them on purely part-time basis. Respondent No. 2 was employed on contract basis and his services came to an end on completion of contract period.

5. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the Industrial Tribunal:-

"1. Whether there was relationship of employer and employee between the workman and the managements? OPW.

2.













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top