HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Arvind Kumar Soni – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER
1. With consent, heard finally. 2. Petitioner, who was appointed as daily rated employee in the year 1996 was terminated w.e.f. 02.08.1999. Admittedly, said termination order could not sustain judicial scrutiny and the Labour Court by award dated 29.07.2013 (Annexure P/11) set aside the termination and directed reinstatement of the petitioner without back wages. The said order was unsuccessfully challenged by the employer which came to be dismissed on 15.07.2015 (Annexure P/2). In obedience thereof, the petitioner was reinstated by order dated 16.12.2020. In furtherance thereof, the petitioner joined on 17.12.2020. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the petitioner is 'reinstated', it is immaterial whether the petitioner has worked or not between 02.08.1999 (the date of termination) till 17.12.2020 (date of reinstatement). 4. Shri Kunal Thakre, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation has taken a diametrically opposite stand that petitioner was not in employment between 02.08.1999 till his reinstatement on 17.12.2020. Thus, his services cannot be treated to be continued and therefore, he is not entitled for regularisation.
5. Partie
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.