ORDER

This petition is filed by the contractor being aggrieved of order dated 28.07.2017 for which award was published on 14.09.2017 by the learned Labour Court, Sidhi, as contained in Annexure P-1 on the ground that workman Mahendra Singh had initially filed a claim to the effect that his land was acquired and was given employment in lieu of such acquisition of land, therefore, his services could not have been dispensed with. Later on, Labour Court treating him to be an employee of the petitioner i.e. Power Mech Project Ltd., granted compensation in lieu of reinstatement.

Shri Sanjay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of the provisions contained in Section 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, since work of construction of industry which was given to the petitioner was completed, there could not have been any reinstatement or any compensation in lieu of reinstatement.

Shri Prabhakar Singh and Shri Alok Hoonka, learned counsel for the respondents, support the impugned award.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record.

Sub-section (1) of Section 25FFF provides that

"where an undertaking is closed down for any reason whatsoever, every workman who has been in continuous service for not less than one year in that undertaking immediately before such closure shall, subject to the provisions of sub- section (2), be entitled to notice and compensation in accordance with the provisions of section 25F, as if the workman had been retrenched: Provided that where the undertaking is closed down on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the employer, the compensation to be paid to the workman under clause (b) of section 25F, shall not exceed his average pay for three months."

When this provision is taken into consideration, then sine qua non for bringing an entity within the four corners of the provisions contained in sub- section (1) of Section 25FFF is the closure of the undertaking and not the completion of work. There is no material on record to show that Power Mech Project Ltd. has been closed off. Completion of work does not mean closure of the undertaking i.e. the petitioner and when tested provisions of Section 25FFF will not be applicable.

Petition fails and is dismissed.

Petitioner to bear cost of this litigation for the workman which is quantified at Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only).