Collector, Jaipur Collectorate ... vs Ram Swaroop Sharma S/O Shri ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6420 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

             D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 166/2021

1.     Collector, Jaipur Collectorate Office, Bani Park, Jaipur.
2.     Sub-Divisional Officer, Dudu, Tehsil Dudu, District Jaipur.
                                                                  ----Appellants
                                   Versus
1.     Ram Swaroop Sharma S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal Sharma, R/o
       Sarangpura, Tehsil Sanganer, Jaipur
2.     Controller, Rajasthan State Motor Garage, Sahakar Marg,
       Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG with Ms. Archana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shiv Charan Gupta

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

12/11/2021

This appeal is filed by the State Government to challenge the

judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 06.01.2021.

Respondent No.1 was engaged as a driver in the Office of the

Collector, Jaipur. He approached the Labour Court alleging illegal

termination without following the provisions of the Industrial

Disputes Act. The Labour Court allowed the reference setting aside

his termination and directed reinstatement with 50% backwages.

The Collector challenged the said award before the learned

Single Judge. The learned Single Judge under the impugned

judgment recorded that the concerned workman had produced the

documents to prove that he has been continuously working with

(2 of 2) [SAW-166/2021]

the petitioners from the year 2013-2015 (appears to be a

typographical errors since the workman claimed that he had

worked from the year 2007-2015). He had also produced evidence

in support of the same. The learned Judge had noted that the

witness of the department did not present himself for cross-

examination and no documents were produced by the department.

Under such circumstances, the learned Single Judge was of

the opinion that was no error committed by the Labour Court

which can be corrected in exercise of the writ jurisdiction.

We have perused the award of the Labour Court and other

documents on record and heard the arguments of the parties.

We notice that before the Labour Court the workman has

produced voluminous evidence. The department produced no

evidence whatsoever in defence. Witness though presented a

sworn affidavit but did not remain present for cross-examination.

His deposition was therefore rightly ignored by the Labour Court.

The findings of fact arrived at by the Labour Court as upheld by

the learned Single Judge call for no interference.

The appeal is dismissed.

                                   (REKHA BORANA),J                                                 (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

                                   KAMLESH KUMAR/N.GANDHI/5









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)