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

2025 Supreme(MP) 49

SANJAY DWIVEDI
Vijay Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Manoj Kushwah for petitioner; Deepak Tiwari, Panel Lawyer for respondents/State.

ORDER

1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is finally heard.

2. In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the assail is to an award dated 8.8.2008 (Annexure-P/12) pronounced on 28.11.2008 whereby the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rewa, while deciding the industrial dispute on a reference made by the Labour Commissioner has decided the reference holding therein that the order passed by the respondent/Department terminating the petitioner’s services was illegal as the retrenchment was made without following the proper procedure. At the same time, it has also been observed that the petitioner is neither entitled to be reinstated in service nor to get any back-wages. However, the petitioner was found entitled to get compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/-.

3. As per the facts of the case, the petitioner was appointed as a Guard (Labour) in the office of respondent No.3 in the year 1984 and thereafter, a letter was issued by the officer of the respondent/Department on 15.10.1989 asking the petitioner to work at Chapila Chowki.

(3.1) An association of the labourers known as Bhrastachar Unmoolan Sangthan was formed, in which, the

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