Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH TIWARI TIWARI Date:

2026.03.03

18:42:01 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(L) No. 133 of 2014 Reserved on 04.12.2025 Pronounce on 03.03.2026 Uploaded on 03.03.2026 Sanjeev Tripathi S/o Shri Awadh Narayan Tripathi Aged About 40 Years R/o House No. 16/218, New Mandi Ward, Lodhipara Chowk, P.S. Pandri Raipur , Distt. Raipur C.G. Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner Versus

1. Grasim Cement And Ors. S/o Through Its Vice President Post Rawan, Tahsil Simga, Distt. Baloudabazar C.G., 2. State Industrial Court, Chhattisgarh, Nagar, Ghari Chwok, P.S. Civil Line, Raipur , Distt. Raipur C.G.

3. Labour Court No.2, Through Presiding Officer C/o Labour Court No. 1, Anand Nagar, Ps Telibandha, Raipur Distt. Raipur C.G.

--- Respondents Cause Title is taken from CIS system __________________________________________________________________

For Petitioner : Shri Sudeep Johari and Shri J.K. Gupta, Advocates.

For Respondent No. 1 : Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rahul Ambast, Ms. Shatabdi Bagchi and Shri Ishaan Singh Rathore Advocates.

__________________________________________________________________

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

CAV Judgment

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated

19.03.2014 passed by the State Industrial Court, Raipur (C.G.) in Civil Appeal No. 09/CGIRAct/A/II/2013 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed affirming the order dated 04.02.2013 passed by Labour Court No.2, Raipur in New Case No.07/2011 C.G.I.R. Act Old Case No. 66/1996 CGIR Act by which the application of the petitioner filed under Section 31(3) read with Sections 61 and 62 of MP/CG Industrial Relation Act, 1960 (for short “Act of 1960”) was dismissed.

2. The facts which emerge from the record are that the petitioner was appointed by respondent No.1 as Trainee Electrician vide order 25.11.1994 (treating joining with effect from 07.11.1994 as mentioned in the order itself) on monthly wages of Rs. 1,500/- initially for a period of one year, further extendable depending on satisfactory performance, and thereafter he joined his services and he worked as such continuously for more than fifteen months and as such was entitled to be declared as regular permanent employee. However, on 30.03.1996 the petitioner was inflicted the punishment of one day suspension without giving an opportunity of hearing. Further case of the petitioner is that on 06.04.1996 he suffered an injury on his leg during work and for that he received treatment in the hospital of respondent No.1 and also took two day rest for 08.04.1996 and 09.04.1996. On 11.04.1996, the petitioner reported on duty with the requisite medical certificate but he was not allowed to join. On 11.04.1996 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner asking him to explain in writing within 72 hours of its receipt as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. The show cause notice also mentions that if the explanation did not come from the petitioner within the stipulated time, it would be assumed that he had nothing to say and the matter would be dealt with accordingly without any further reference to him. Reply to the show cause notice was submitted by the petitioner on 18.04.1996. According to the petitioner, even thereafter on many occasions he presented himself in the establishment of respondent No.1 but he was not allowed to work. Thus according to the petitioner his services orally came to be terminated on 09.04.1996. On 18.07.1996, the petitioner filed an application before the Labour Court, Raipur under Section 31(3) read with sections 61 and 62 of the Act of 1960 with a prayer to regularize his appointment as Trainee Electrician, for declaring the order dated 11.04.1996 (which in fact is a show-cause notice) as illegal and for release of the salary withheld by order dated 12.04.1996. Subsequently, by way of amendment the petitioner also sought for setting aside the order o