Mr. Amit Kumar vs Mr. Vipul Poddar
2021 Latest Caselaw 74 Jhar

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                                 W.P.(L). No. 3447 of 2012
                                                ----------

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK (Through: Video Conferencing) For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Vipul Poddar, Advocate

-----------

11/ 06.01.2021 Heard the parties at length.

It is the specific submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that without issuance of one month's notice, the workman could not have been terminated from the services.

Contrary to the same, Mr. Vipul Poddar, learned counsel appearing for the Management draws the attention of the Court towards Section 26 of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Act 1953 and submits that Section 26 of the Act itself is very clear on the point that the services can be dispensed with after giving atleast one month's notice or one month's wages in lieu of such notice. In the instant case, services of the workman has been terminated by giving three months wages and as such, there is no illegality in terminating the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, prays for some time to bring on record the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein interpretation of Section 26(1) of the Act has been made.

As prayed, put-up this case after three weeks under the heading "For Final Disposal".

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) kunal/-