JUDGMENT :

Alok Mathur, J.

1. Heard Sri M. S. Vinayak, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Karunanidhi Yadav as well as learned Standing counsel for respondent no. s 1 and 2, Sri Shekhar Srivastava for respondent No.3-workman.

2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the award dated 24.11.2022 passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Noida, District Gautam Buddha Nagar, U.P. whereby allowing the claim of respondent No.3-workman.

3. The facts in brief arising in the present case are that respondent No.3 was employed on the post of Assistant in Grade GO at the establishment of the petitioner company at Pune, Maharashtra and was issued appointment letter on 30.3.2004. As per the appointment letter he was to work in Noida and it was further provided that the services of respondent NO.3 would be terminated by either party by serving prior written notice. It was further provided in the appointment letter that the services of the respondent-workman would be transferable and he could be transferred to any of the establishments of the petitioner whether in India or abroad. The petitioner continued to work since the date of his appointment till 5.12.2008 when hi