Termination without notice or due process violates Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, warranting compensation.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, J. (Oral)

Through instant writ petition, Balwinder Kaur-Worklady has challenged the award dated 08.02.2022 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Patiala, whereby reference No. 132 of 2018, filed under Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the Act of 1947') has been answered in her favour, however, same has been disposed of by granting a lump sum amount of compensation of Rs. 25, 000/- as well as Rs. 5, 000/- towards litigation expenses.

2. Through the demand notice dated 12.04.2018, Balwinder Kaur-worklady pleaded that she joined the Government Middle School, Janherian, as 'Cook' on 01.01.2010. However, without assigning any reason, issuing show cause notice or charge-sheet, conducting enquiry or paying retrenchment compensation, her services were terminated on 01.09.2017. Thus, by pleading that the worklady worked with the Management from 01.01.2010 to 31.08.2017 for about more than seven years and six months, she has been illegally terminated from the services. It was also pleaded that at the time of removal from service, she was drawing salary at the rate of Rs. 1, 700/- per month.

3. In response to the claim, respondent-Management took a stand that infact the worklady had joined on 01.08.2011 but in consequence to the resolution dated 08.07.2011 passed by the School-Management Committee, the correct date of joining of service is 08.07.2011 and not 01.01.2010. However, there is no denial to the date of termination from the service.

4. Infact worklady worked as Mid day Meal cook-cum- Helper alongwith some other employees. Management also pleaded that Balwinder Kaur-worklady is the junior most 'cook' and there is nothing wrong in terminating her services. It was further pleaded that as per the requirement of the work of cooking, the services were obtained. Thus, there being no definite work and as per the terms of the appointment letter, she could be terminated at any point of time.

5. After framing total four issues, learned Tribunal examined the evidence and other material available on record. It was noticed that as per the instructions of Head office of Mid Day Meal Society, Punjab, the cook-cum-Helper has to be appointed as per the following ratio:

6. While appointing the worklady, vide resolution dated 08.07.2011, it was clearly decided that the strength of the school children was increasing to the level of 131, therefore, One Mid Day Meal Cook-cum-Helper is required. It was also resolved that in case of downfall in the strength of the school children, the worker shall be removed.

7. Lastly, Labour Court concluded that the worklady had worked for 240 days in the preceding one year of her termination and there was a clear admission of the witness of the Management i.e. MW1 that no seniority list of Mid Day Meal Cook was maintained on district level by the DEO. It has also been admitted by MW1 that Punjab Civil Service Rules are not applicable to the worklady.

8. Infact, the stand of the respondent is that the services were terminated after receiving of the instructions from the Head Office, however, the Labour Court concluded that the said action is not conclusive. Therefore, held that the termination as bad and in violation of provisions of Section 25F of the Act of 1947.

For reference, relevant and extracted findings recorded by learned Tribunal in its award is reproduced herebelow:

" The services of the claimant with the respondent till 31-08- 2017 has not been denied, It has been contended that "intimation was given to the applicant regarding her termination and moreover her last wages were also paid to her on 27-10-2017". It is further contender that in this case no Civil Service Rules are applicable for the applicant, hence no charge-sheet, enquiry or payment of compensation is required as per la