S I S S i LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT I_87900.pdf · Rajipur Jhajra 108 Ambala. Surajpur 109 -...

Rajipur Jhajra 108 Ambala.

Surajpur 109 - Do

t a m eI] HARYANA GOVT GAZ , SEPT. 18, 1979 (BHDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) 1495l e a l I S I S S i

LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

The 9th August, 1979

No. of the' powers conferred by section 87 read with section 91Aof the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, the Governor of Haryana hereby renews the exemption toevery factory situated in the following areas from the operation of the provisions of Chapter IV (exceptsections 44 and 45), Chapter V and Chapter VI (except sub -section 1. of section 76, sections 77, 78, 79and.81 No. $877-5Lab-77/27904-A, dated the 31st October, 1977 for a further period of one year tom the 21st August,1978 to 20th August, 1979.

SerialNumber

Village Hadbast No. District

2.

the 4th September, 1979

Na. 12(329) -78 -Lab. --The Governor of Haryana is pleased to dissolve the District Committeeoi Enploymnt , Rohtak No. 12(3,29)-78-6Lab, dated 26th April, 1979with immediate effect.

H. L.:GUGNANI, Secy.

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

The 4th September, 1979

17 of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following award of thePresiding Officer, Labour Court. Rohtak in respect of the dispute between the workman and the managementof MIS Subhash Flour Mills, Tirath Market, , Sortepat.

B32 t SH B BU RAM GG V A, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT,ARYANA, ROHTAK

ZIReferanee No. 295 of 1978

between

SHRT HA w k SINGH, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S SUBHASH FLOURMILLS, TIRATH .MARKET, SONEPAT

Present

No one for the workman.

Siri Krish In Cain ' for the mtnagement .

'AW ARD

Bj 0:32.,c No. fD/SP 006-78/41561, dated 20th October, 1978, the Governor of H,aryana referred thefollowing dispate between the management Of M/s Subhash Flour Mills, Tirath Market, Sonepat and itswo:kattn Shrt Htwa Singh to this Court, for adjudication in exercise of the powers conferred'by clause (c) ofth3 sn-s.r ;ti cu (t) of s tion 10 of , the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Whether the termination of the service .of Shri Hawa Singh was justified and in order ?If not, to what relief is he entitled ?. -

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issued to the parties. The parties appearedand filed their pleading and on the basis of the pleading of the parties the following issue was

1 4 e -framed by learned predecessor ;

' Whzther th-3 term:nation fservic2s of Shri Hawa Singh was justified and in order ? Ifnot, to what relief is he entitled?

1496 HARYANA GOVT GAZ., SEPT. 18, 1979 (013DR. 27, 1901 SAKA) PART' I

And the - case was fixed for evidence of the management. The management produced letterwritten by the wdrkman dated. 14th April, 1979 in which he stated that he has set t l e his claimwith the management and wanted this case to be dismissed. The representative of the workmanwas directed to produce 'the workman in this court on 5th June, 1979 to confirm or deny th; letter. Theworkman was not produced on 5th June, '1979 and I again adjourned the ease for 3rd July, 1979,for producing the workman. On 3rd.. July, 1979 even the representative of the workman who waspresent on the last two dates did not appear before me and I ordered ex parte proceedings against theworkman. Statement of Shri Krishan Chandcr partner was recorded who exhibited the settlementletter dated 14th April, 1979 as.Ex. M-1 and stated that the workman is. not Ionise irning because ofthe settlement. In these circumstances I answer this reference and given my avard that the termina-tion of service of the workman was justified and in order; and he is not entitled to any furtherrelief.

Dated 3Ist July, 1979.BABU RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour -Court, Haryana,

Rohtak.

Endorsement No. 1880, dated 31st August, 1979Forwarded (four :Copies) to the Secretary to Governmmt of Haryana, Labour and Employ-

ment Department, Chandigarh as reluired under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

BABY RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court, Haryana,

Rohtak.

No. 11.(112)49-3Lab/8775, --In pursuance of the provisions of section 17 of the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the follow-ing award of the Presidiag Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak, in respect of the dispute -between theworkman and the management of M/s Hari Palace, Atnbala City.

BEFORE SHRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT,HARYANA,

Reference No. 143 of 1977

between

SHRI CHANDER PARKAS H, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S -HARTPALACE, AMBALA CITY

Present :Shri Chander Parkash workman in 'person.

Shri P. P. Khurana, for the management along with Shri Prem of themanagement..

AWARD

By order No. ID/FD/25398-401, dated 5th July, 1977, the Governor of Haryana referredthe following dispute between the management of M/s Hari Palace, Ambala City and its workmanShri Chancier ParkaSh to this Court, for adjudication in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c)of sub -section (1) -o f . section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1'947

Whether the termination of. service of Shri Chander Parkash was justified and in order 7If not, to what relief is he entitled ?

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issued to the parties. The parties appeared andfiled their pleadings and on the Ple4dings of. the parties the following isSues were framed by my learnedpredecessor on 30th June, 1978 :-

1. As per reference. ,

And fixed the case for evidence of the parties on 28th August, 1978. The evidenceof the managementdid net come and on 23rd October, 1978 my learned predecessor closed the evidence of the management

PART I] HARYANA GOVT GAZ.,. SEPT. IS, 1979 (flHDR. /7, 1901 SAKA) 1497

and fixed the case for evidence of the worknlan. But by his order dated 20th December, 1978 my learnedpredecessor again allowed the management to produce their evidence or payment of cost and the manage-ment produced their evidence on 20th March, 1979, and after -the closing of management' evidence fixedthe case for evidence of the workman on 26th June, 1-979. The workman appeared and made the following

"I have shifted from Ambala Cantt to jullundur and I am not interested in my reinstatement..This reference may be treated as filed. I do -not want to get myself reinstated."

-In view of the statement of the workman I answer this reference and give my award that the

termination of service mithe workman was justified and in order and he is not entitled to any furtherrelief.

BABU RAM GOYAL,Dated 21st July, 1979. Presiding Officer,

f t Labour Court, Haryana,Rohtak.

Endorsement No. 1878, dated 7th August, 1979. -

Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary, to Government of Haryana, Labour and EmploymentDepartment, Chandigarh, as required under sectiOn 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,

M a l R A M G O Y A L ,. Presiding. Officer,

Labour Court, Haryana,- Rofitak.

17 of the Industrial Dis ,putes Act, 1947 (Act No. XIV, of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the followingaward of the Presiding Officer, Labo'ir Court, Rohtak in respect of the 'dispute between the workmanand the management of M/s Sari ider Rolling Mills, near Shadi Metal works, behind Ram Lila Ground,

BEFORE SHRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, beHARYANA, ROHTAK..

Reference No. 278 of 1978between

SHRI JIT RAM, WORKMAN AND THE, MANAGEM2NT OF MIS SURINDER ROLLINGMILLS, NEAR S H A N METAL WORKS, BEHIND RAM LILA. GROUND, JAGADHRI -. 1

No one for the workman.Shri subhash Chander for the management.

AWARD .

By order No. ID/Ymn182-78/43835, dated 4th October, 1978, the Governor of Haryana referredthe following dispute between the managensent of Mis Surinder Rolling Mills, near Shadi Metal works,behind R im . Lil a Ground, Japih i and its wo,kman Sari -.Tit R i m to this Court, for adjudication inexercise of tho Powers conferre. d by clause sub -section (1) of secti in 10 of the IndustrialDisputes Act,

Whether the termination of services of Shri ht. Ram WAS justified and, in order I Ifnot, to what relief is he entitled ?

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issued to -the parties. Tee parties appeared beforeme and the workman filed his claim statement. Tile management settled the claim with the workmanand produced his letter dated 21st February, 1979 wherein the workin In hid written that the workmanhas settled his calm with the management. The case was adjourned for confirmation and varificationof the letter by the workman - to be done on 25th Ap:il, 1974. The workm tu did not appear on 25thApril, 197) and on the reqaest or Shri Sarinder Kumar representative tof the workman the case wasadjourned td 25th- May, -1979- whm no one appeared on -behalf of the workman and I 'passed the following

No one for the workman.Shri Subj.-Kish Chnnder for the management.

The workman has sent letter dated 21st February, 1979 wherein he has stated that he hassettled his case with the management and does not want to pursue, this case which may be filed.

a i r s

1498 HARYANA GOVT GAZ., SEPT. 18, 1979 (311DR. 27, 1901 SAKA) [PART I

In view of the circumstances I answer this reference and give my award that the termination ofthe services of workman was justified and in order,and the workman is not entitled to any further relief.

Dated 21st. July, 1979.

BAI3U RAM. GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court, Haryana.

. Robtak.

Endst. No. 1877, dated 7th August, 1979.

Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary. to Government :Haryana, Labots and EmploymentDepartment, Chandigarh as required under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

)3ABU RAM GOYAL,


Rohtak.

1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following award of thePresiding Officer. Labour Court, Rohtak, in respect of the dispute between the workman and the manage-ment of M/s Industrial Cable (India) Ltd., Lai Chand Nagar, Kila Zagargarh, District Jind (Haryana)

BEFORE SHRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, HARYANA,ROHTAK

Reference No; 166 of 1978

SHRI RANDHIR SYNCH, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S INDUSTRIAL CABLE(INDIA) LTD., LAL CHAND NAGAR, KILA ZAGARGARH, DISTRICT JIND.

. . (HARYANA)

Ski Chancier Singh alongwith the workman, ,

Shri C. M. Lal, alone with B.D. Gulati, Factory Manager, for the management.

AWAII13

By order No. ID/KNL/43-78/33505, dated 18th July, 1978, the Governor of Haryana referred thefollowing dispute between the management of M/s Industrial' Cable, (India) Ltd., La! Chand Nagar, KilaZagargarh, District End and its workman Shri hi Ram to this Court, for adjudication in exercise of the powersconferred by clause (c) of subsection (1) of section ii of the-Indastrial Disputes Act,

"Whether the termination of services of Shri Randhir Singh was justified and in order?If not , to what relief is he entitled?

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issued to the parties. The parties appeared and filedtheir, pleadings and on the basis of their pleadings the following issues were, framed by my learned.predecessor on 20th September, 1978

I. Whether the termin/tion of services of the worianan was justified And in order?

. 2. If not, to what relief is he entitled ?

'And fixed the case for evidence of the management. The management produced their partevidence on 10th May, 1979. However when the case was taken up on 12th July, 1979 for further evidenceof the management the parties arrived at a settlement and their statements were recorded, which arereproduced below

Statement Singh, Worliman

The management has agreed to reinstate me on the post of Peon at wages which I wasdrawing at the time, of termination of my services with effect from 14th July, 1979 (After noon) with

PART II HARYANA GOVT. GAL, SEPT. 18, 1979 .(31IDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) 149911110 .1 1 . 1111.-

25 per cent of back wages. view of this settlement no other claim for the period from the date ofmy termination till 14th July, 1979 will remain outstanding with the management. This reinstatement willhave continuity of service. This reference may be settled accordingly.

Statement of Shri B. D. G latl, Factors Manager for the respondent.

have heard the statement of workman Shri Randhir Singh he will be taken on duty with effectfrom 14th July, 1979 (After noon) at the wages which be was drawing at the time of termination of his

cent of his back wages with continuity of service. The settlementhave taken place as the workman has agreed to work as peon and he will not raise any claim in respectof the period from the date of termination to 14th July, 1979,

In view of the statemeht . of the parties, I answer this reference and while giving my award-make the statements of the parties a part of my award. The workman will be treated -to have beenreinstated with effect from 14th July, 1979 (After noon) on the post or peon en the sante wages whichhe was drawing at the time of termination of his services and in respect of the period, from the daleof h is termination to 1979 he will be paid 25 per cent of his back wages with continuityof service.

Dated, the 28th July, 1979.BABU RAM GOYAL,

Officer,Labour Court, Haryana.

Rohtak.

Endst. No. 1876, dated the 7th August, 1979

Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary to Government of Haryana. Labour and Employment Departmeats, Chandigarh as required under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,

BABU RAM GOYAL,


Rohtak.

pursuance of the previsions of section 17 of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947). the Governor of Haryana is pleased to -publish the following award

of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak in respect of the dispute between the ' workmanand the Management of Mls Parkash Tubes Ltd., Rohtak-Delhi Road, Bahadurgarh

BEFORE SH1U BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, HARYANAROHTAK


between

SHRI JAI RAM, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF MIS PARKASH TUBES LTD. ,ROHTAK-DELM. ROAD, BAHADURGARH

Shri Rajinder Singh for the workman.

Shri C. L. Aggarwal for , the management.

AWARD

By order No. IWATK/48-78/33547, dated 13th July. 1978, the Goverdor of Haryana referredthe following dispute between the management of IA is Parkash Tubes Ltd.; Rohtak-Delhl Road,Bahadurgarh and its workman Shri Jai Ram, to this Court, for adjudication in exercise of thepowers conferred by clause (c) of sub -section (I) of section 10 of the Industrial 'Disputes Act,

Whether the termination of service of Shri Jai Ram was justified and in order? Ifnot, to what relief is he entitled?

_Aide

1500 HARYANA GOVT GAZ., SEPT. 18,1979 (BH,DR. 27, 1901 SAICA) [ P a n I ,

O n receipt of ordet of .reference; notices were issued to the parties. The parties appearedand filed their pleadings. On the pleadings of the parties, the following Issues were framed bymy on 21st September, 1.978:--

1. Whether the management bas been described by wrong name? if so, to what effect?

2, Whether there is relation of master and servant between the parties at the relevant period?

3.. Whether there is no cause of action?

4. If the workman is found to -be in the mnpolyment of. the management whether thetermination of service of the workman was justified and in order?

- 5. If not to what relief is he entitled?' ,

- And fixed the case for , the . evideno:, of the parties. The parties arrived at a settlement undersection 18 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Inspector on 8th June, 1,979 andmade the

Statement of SW Rajinder Singh, Authorised Representative of the Workman.

The workman IIRS settled his case with the management and received Rs. 1,100/- in full andfinal settlement of his claim. He withdraws his case for- reinstatement and this reference may be filed

Statement of Shri C. L. Aggarwal

" I have heard the statement of Shri Raiinder Singh. The settlement, dated 8th Jane, 1979 photo-stat copy Ex. M-1 and receipt Ex. M-2 are correct according to the original settlement with me. Theworkrnan has settled his case. No dispute award may be given. "

In view at the statements of the parties1 answer this reference and given my no dispute awardin view of the statement of claim of Rs, 1,100 received by the workman in full and final .settlemeut of theclaim.

Dated the 27th July, 1979.

BABU RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court. Haryana.

Rohtak.

Endorsement No. 1871,'dated 7th August, 1979.

Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary to Government of Haryana, Labour and Employment Depart-ment, Chandigarh as required under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947.

BABU RAM GOYAL.

Padding Officer,Labour Court, Haryana,

Rohtak.

No. 11(112)-79-3Lab/8782.--In pursuance of the provisions of section 17 of the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 (Act No. xtv or .1o47), the Governor of Haryana is - pleased to publish thefollowing award of the Presiding Officer, Tabour Court, Rohtak in respect of the dispute betweenthe workmen and the Management of

.BEFORE SHRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, HARYANA,

ROHTAK , .


between

SHRI KUN DAN LAL WORKMAN AND TITE MANAGEMENT OF MIS SI-ME E MADDAYANAND DHARMARTH IHOSPITAL, ROHTAK

Shri Kundan Lal workman in person along wi th Shd S . N. Vats.

Shri S. D. Chawla for the management.

' PART f l

p4

TIARYALNA GOVT GAZ., 'SEPT. 18, 1979 (BHDR. 27,1901 SAKA) 1501

AWARD,

By order No. 0/RK/436-7'7/42315, dated 19th September, 1979, the Governor of Haryanareferred dispute between the management of M/s. Shree Mad Dayanand Dharmarth

_ .. _ . . _ . .Hospital, Rontax ano itS O W , T . L J I I L J $ . " J a i I t ) i n n . L o u r t , M r ad j Ud I C a l l O r l In exercin of thepowers conferred by clause (c) of sub-seetion (I) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, .1947.

- Whether the termination of service of Slut kundan Lal was justified and in order ?not, to what relief is he entitled ?

On receipt of order of reference, notice were issued to the parties. The parties appeared and'filed their -pleading and on the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed by mylearned predecessor on 2nd January, 1979.

1. Whether $hri Subhash Batra the Advocate is 'legally ,competent to appear for themanagement (OPM)

Whether the said Hospital is not an industry under the L. D. Act ?

3. Whether terrnMation of service of the workman was justified and in Order ?

A. ,If not, to whatirelief is he entitled ?

And-fixed the case for evidence of the management. The management produced. their Pv .. .jAenno1971. After two adjournments the parties settled their Fuse mutually and made their

Statement of Shri Minden Lal, workman.,

have agreed to receive Rs. 300(- from the management, in respect of termination my serviceas cdmpensation. On receipt of this amount no claim in respect of this reference will remain out:standing with the management.

Statement of Sit. S.D. Chawla, Chairman of the management hospital

hive Settled the claim Of the workman in consideration Of payment of Rs. 300/-. Thisamount will be paid to the workman in cash on 15th July, 1979. After payment of this amounthe claim of the workman will stand ,settled:

In view of the statements of the parties I answer this reference and give nis award that.he parties have settled their ease in consideration of Payment of Rs. 500/- by the management torhe workman the dispute stands settled with the parties and the workman is not entitled to anyfurther relief.

Dated 21st July, 1979 BARU RAM GOYAL,


Rohtak.

Endst. No. 1883, dated 7th August, 1979

Forwarded (roar Copies) to the Secretary to Government of 'Haryana-, Labour andEmployment Departments, Chandigarh as required unde'r section 15 of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947.

BART.' RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court, HaryaAa,

Rohtak.

No. 11(112)-79-3Lab/8783.-1n pursuance of the provisions of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes, Act,1947 (Act No. XTV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following award of the

of M/s.. .

0 0 2 HARYANA GOVT GAL, SEP1. i s, 1979 (BHDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) [ P a n I

BEFORE SHRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, HARYANA,ROHTAK


between

SHRI MADHO RAM, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF MIS. ALLIED METALPRODUCT, GANDHI MARG, JAGADHRI

Surinder Kumar, for the workman.

Shri Subash Chander, for the management.

AWARD

By order No. ID/Amb145-79/21859, dated 18th May, 1979; the Governor of Haryana referred .the following dispute between the management of M/s. Allied Metal Prcduct. Gandhi Marg. Jagadhri,and its workman Shri Madho Ram to this Court, for adjudication. in exercise of the powers conferredby clause (c1 of sub -section section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947:

"Whether the termination of the services of Shri Madho Ram was justified and in order ? If not,to what relief is he entitled ?

On receipt of order of reference; notices were issued to the parties. The parties appeared andfiled a statement Ex. uj-1 and girl Surinder. Kumar, representative of the workman made the follow-ing statement on 28th June, 1979.

Statement of ShH Surinder Kumar, Representative of the workman

A settlement Ex. W-1 has been arrived at hetween the Parties. The Management has given acheque for Rs. 1632.77 to the workman in full and final -settlement or his claim against the management.This reference may be filed,

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties I answer this reference and give my award. that termination of the service of the workman is justified ind in order and he is not entitled to

any further relief.

Dated 21st July, 1979.

Endst. No. 1881, dated 7th August, 1979.

' Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary to Government of Haryana, Labour and Employment Depart.s mantis, Chandigarh, as required under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

the provisions of section 17 of the Industrial DisputeAct, 1947 (Act No. XIN of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following awardof the Presiding Officer, Labour Court ; Ratak , in respect of the dispute between the workman and themanagement of M/9: Oberoi Metal Industries, Jagadhri. .

BEFORE t HRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDNIG OFFICE, LABOUR COURT, HARYANA,ROHTAK

Reference No, 46 of 1978

BABU RAM GOYAB,Feed ing Officer,

Labour Merl, Haryana,Rohtak.

- ,-- between'

StIRT N4OHINDER SINGH WORKMAN AND THE VIANAGWVIENT OR MIS. ,OBEROI METALINDUSTRIES , JAGADHR1

Present I--

Shri Surinder Kumar, for the workman..

No. one for the management.

HABIT RAM GOYAD,Presiding Officer,

Labour Court, Haryana,Robtak.

PART I] HARYANA GOVT. GAZ., SEPT. 18, 1979 (BHDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) 1503

AWARD

By order No. ID/Amb/8/78/9593, dated 3rd March, 1978, the Governor of Haryana referred thefol-lowing dispute between the management Mts. Oberoi Metal Industries, Jagadhri and its workman :Shri

-Milinder Singh to this court, for adjudication in exercise as the powers conferred by class (c) of sub-section (I) of section 10 of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

"Whether the termination of service of Shri Mahinder Singh was justified and in order? If not,- _ _to what relief is he entitled ? -

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issues to the parties. The workman appear but thenotice issued to the management was received back with the report "left without address". Notices wereissued to the management for 26th April 1978, 28th June, 1978, 22nd November, 1978, 21st December,

' 1978, 24th January, 1978, 20th March, 1979, etc., but the service could not be effected on the manage-ment. On 20th March 1979 the representative of the workman stated that the workman has settled hisclaim with the management and he has received his dues and does not want to pursue the case. Iadjourned the case for producing of the workman. Three adjournment were granted and the case wasfixed for 28th June, 1979ond no one appeared on behalf of the workman even. In this circumstances Ihave been left with no alternative but to dismiss this case for non -prosecution by.the workman himself.In these circumstances I T e a l i l l this reference without giving any award. The same has been dismissedin default for non -prosecution by the workman.

Dated, the 31st July, 1979.BABLI RAM GOYAL,


Rohtak:Endst. No. 1884, dated the 7th August, 1979.

Forwarded (Four Copies) to the Secretary to Government of Haryana, Labour & EmploymentDepartments, Caandigarh as required under section 15 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947.

BADLY RAM GOYAL,Presidin g Officer,

Labour Court, Haryana,Ra t a k .

provisions of section 17 of jhe Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following award of thePresiding Officer, Labour Court Rollick, in respect of the dispute between the workman and the managementof Ms/ S. K. Industries (Chappal Factory) Shivaji Colony, Circular Road, Rohtak.

BEFORE SHRI BARU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT,HARYANA,- ROHTAK

Reference No. 17 of 1979Between

s i t u JAGJISH, YADAV AN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF MS S . K. INDUSTRIES(CHAPPAL FAG may) saIVAJE CaLON CIRCULAR ROAD, RO,ITAK.

Prettit: Sin Balxydat Singh, for the workman.No. one for the management. -

AWARD

By order No. ID/RTKJ7-79/3132, dated 19th January, 1979. Thb Governor of Haryana referred the[olio wing dispute between the management of Mis S. K. Industries (Chapin! Factory) Shivaji Colony, CircularRaid, dal its wocic urn Sari lagdish tidy/ to,this Court, for adjudication in exercise of the powersconferred by clause (c) of sub -section (i) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act,

Whether the termination of services of Shri Jagdish Yadav was justified and in order ? if not,to what relief is he entitled ?

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issued to the parties. The parties appeared and filed theirpleadings. But When the case was fixed for filing rejoinder by the workman Shri Balwant Singh representative

Statement of Shri Balwant Singh, representatile of the orkman.

Inspite of' adjournment for filing rejoinder the workman is not coming and has gore to Bihar i.e.lo his natiree place and he has no instructions. In view of the writtcn staumerd filed by thtmanagement.1 he represenative of the workman is not itt a position to persue this reference and same may be tiled,

1504 HARYANA GOVT GAZ., SEPT. IS, 1979 (BHDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) [PART I

In view of the statement of the representative of workman I return this reference without givingany award and treat this Were= to have been dismissed in default on account of non-porsecution of thecase uy the workman.

BABU RAM GOYAL,

Dated the 21st July, 1979. Presiding Officer,Labour Court, Haryana, Rohtak.

r _Endst. No. 1882, dated the 7th August, 1979

Forwarded (four, copies) to the Secretary to Government to Haryana, Labour and 4EmploymeutDepartments, Chandigarh as required under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

BABU RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court, Haryana, Rohtek.

NO.1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following award of the PresidingOfficer, Labour Court, Rohtak in respect of the dispute between the workman and the management of M/s Barara.Co-operative Marketing Cum Prozessing Society Limited Berate, District Ambala.

BEFORE SEIM BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER., LABOUR COURT, HARYANA,RCIFITAK.


SHRI GIRDHARI LAL WORKMAN AND THE, MANAGEMENT OF MIS THE BA RARA-CO-OPERATIVEMARKETING CUM PROCESSING SOCIETY LIMITED BARARA, DISTRICT

AMBALA.

tan R:ejeshwar Nath for the applicant.

No rine In the reipandent vataagement.

AWARD

By order No. ID/Amb/24-79/15433, dated 6th April, 1979,the GoVernor of Haryana referred the followingdisputes between the management of M/s The Barara Co-operative Marketing Cum PrOcessing Society LimitedBarara, District.Ambala and its workman, Shrt Girdhari Lal to this Court, for adjudication., in exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (c) of sub -section (1) ofsection 10 of the Industrial Disputes . Act, 1947

Whether the termination of iervices of Shri Girdhari Lal was justified and in order? If not, to whatrelief is he entitled ?

On receipt of order of reference, notices were issued to the p sales, The ;wdrk inn appeared andthe vasaagenseat did rot appear invi te of service o f a s h = and therefore, ermine proceedings wasordered against the in triageaseat 011 22nd 541y, 1979. The filled his claim statement andappesred as WW -I and stated that he was emploied is a driver with the respondent concerned at Rs 510f.per month at the time of hisillegal termination on 11th September, 1978. No enquiry was conducted andno show cause notice was given to him. He raised demand notice which is exhibited, at Exhibit W-1 and Jo,-report of the Cocnillation Officer is Exhibit W-2 and on the refusal of the management the case wasreferred to this Court. He exhibited letter of termination of his service as Exhibit W-3 and alsoproduced a certificate from Chief Medical Officer, Ambala showing his age as 52 years which hisExhibit W-4 and also produced a letter dated 9th September, 1978 Exhibit W-5 s e nt by him in replyto the termination letter. He prayed for re -instatement with full back wages. He also produced anotherWitness Shri Taspal Singh who is also an employees of the Barara Cairn -processingSociety, Barara, who stated that the workman concerned was employed with the respondent as a driversince 1973.The managemet terminated the service of the workman w.e.f. 11th September, 197810 accordancewith-their resolution No. 14 on dated 11th August, 1978 wherein the workman was required to submitproof of his age failing which services will be teminatedw.d.f. 11th September, 1978. The reply submittedby the workman is that he recevied a letter demanding proof of age on 9th September, 1978 and intimatedon 9th September, 1978 that his date of birth was 22th November, 1926. But he could not submit any proofas he was born in Pakistan. This letter is signed by a receipt clerk in token of receipt of the letter. Inview of the exparte evidence produced before me I have no ahernative but to behove in the cvidence

PART I] HARYANA GOVT 0442., SEPT. 18, 1979 (BilDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) 1505

produced by the workman and answer the reference an] give my award that the termination of service ofthe workmen wa s not justified and in order. The service of the workmen was terminated with effectfrom tab Septernier, 1973 bit jhe raised the derma oa 2a1 Sweaty, 1979 and did -not agitate hisclaim for mere tiara three months, which has resulted in unnecessary delay of the reference. In thesecircumnanns of this case I order re -instatement of the workflow with continuity of service but at only50 per cent of his back wages, subject to his submittint me1ical fitness certificate from the Chief MedicalOfficer, Ambala that he is physically fit to work as a driver.

Dated the 31st July, 1979,

BABU RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour. Court, Haryana,

Rohtak.

Endorsement No, 1861, dated the 7th August, 1979

- Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary to Government of Haryana, Labour and Employment Depart.mants,Chataargarb as recP4red under section15 of the InduatrialDisputes Act, 1947,

BABU RAM GOYAL,


Rohtak.

Ns. pursuance of the provisions of section 17 of the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 (Act. No. MV of 1947) the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish thefollovring atrd of the Presiding Officer, Labour Cowl, Rohtak in respect of the dispute betweenthe workman and the Management of Ws Chhabra Industries, C-21,,Industrial Estate, Bahaditrgarh.

BEFORE SIMI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER,LABOUR COURT, HARYi&NA.ROHTAK


between

3/fRI RAM CI1ANDER, WORAMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S CIDIABRA ,INDUSTRIES, C -2I, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BAHADURGAREI (RORTAK)

Sint Rajlader Singh, for the Workintri,Shrt M. M. Katashal,-for the management.

AWARD

By order No. ID/RTK/28-79/10921, dated 7th March, 1979, the Governor of Haryana referredcue followinz diepate between the rainapaneat of 'tis Cattabra Industries, C -2I, Industrial Estate.

thtlargith and its works% in Sari Sari Ram Ctunder to this Court, for adjudication in exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (a) of sub -section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947.

Whether the termination of service of Shri Ram Chancier was justified and 10 order 1If not, to what relief is he entitled 7

On rpmipt of order of referee , notices were issued to the pArties. The parties appearedand filed their pleadings bat obtained a date for settlement. ARE some adjournments they filedsettlement, dated 16th March, 1979. As the settlement was dated 16th March, 1979 and the claimstatement was filed by the workman on 13th April, 1979. The parties were directed to clarifyt h e Position. o n 12th July, 1979 Shri Rijinder Staab, representative of the workman made thefcdlowing

"Ihe workman has settled his claim with the management by settlement, dated 16thMarch, 1979 which is Ex. M-1. No dispute remain outstanding with the managementand the reference may be filed."

In view of this statment I answer this reference- and give no dispute award.

BABU RAM GOYAL,Dated 28th July, 1979. _ Presiding Officer,_Labour Court, Haryana,

Rohtak.

1506 HARY ANA , GiVT GAZ., SEPT. 18, 1979 (BIWA. 27, 1901 SAKA)' p i a I

Endorsement No. 1867, dated 7th. August, 1979,

-Forwarded (four orioles) to the Secretary to Government, Haryana, Labour and Employment.Departrgent, Chandigarh,t,arn reunited under section 15 of Industrial Disputes Ad, 1947.,

BARU RAM GOYAL,


Rohtak.

No. pursuance of the provisions of section 17 of the IndustrialDispute Act, 1947, (Ad No. XIV of 1947), the Governor of the Haryana is pleased to publish thefollowing award of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak, in respect of the dispute betweenthe wdrkman and the management of M/s. Gedore Tool India, Pvt. Ltd., Kundli (Sonepat).

BEFORE SHRI BABU RAM GOYAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR' COURT,HARYANA, ROHTAK

Reference No. 70 of 1977 . .between

s s a t JAI RAW, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF ,M/S, GEDORE TOOLS PVT.LTD., KUNDLE SONBPAT.

s

Seri Jai Rain, workman in person with Shri S. N. Solankhi

Shri S. C. >lank, along with Shri S. S. Sethi fd r ma nagement..

- - AW_ARD. _

. - ID/RK/36S-A-77-23579, dated 17th The Governor ii 'of .11aryanareferred, the following dispute between,, management of Mts..0pdpra roofs., India Pvt . tW Kundli,(Sonepat) arglitrivorknfan'Shri Jai Ram to this court, for adjudications in exorcise i- of the powersconferred by elalise'grof sub section (17 of section 10 of the Industrial -Disputes Act, .1947.

"Whether the termination of Services of Shri Jai Rani was justified' and 'in order 7 If not,

to what relief la he entitled ?"

. Op receipt of order of reference, .notices were issued .to the -parties.. The -parties: appeared andfiled; their pleadings and on,tbe,.. pleadings of the parties the following - Assizes. were framed by me on28th i Martch,"1979. .-

, I. Whether the termination of services of Shri Jai ;Ram was justified and in order ?, .. . -- 2 . If ne t t-O What relief is he entitled ?

The case was fixed for evidence of the management. After one more adjournment the partiesappeared before me on 3rd July, 1979, and settled the case. Their .statements were recorded by me and

be lo w : -

-Statement af Shri Jai Ram, workman and Shri- S. IV, Solankhi.

The workman agrees to accept Rs.' 800 in full and final settlement of all his claim dues anddisputes against the company inzluding the claim for reinstement, re7employment .and _also dues onac,count of u.aptid.w.tips; wsgsi.. lie& u t-aVailed earned leave, bonus etc.,any dues or raise dispute of any kind want so ever againatilie management -át any future time.

Staten:ex ofShri S.C. Malik and Shri S. S..Sithl for the represedtativeof the I n magembnt ,

"We have.. heard the statement of Sh r i J a iya m aid his rep,rei.entati e and we accept the. same."

cf Hr stattn cf 11.e Tallies I ansner this reftierce and gi)cniy cnaid making thethe statements of the parties apart: of it?

. Dated the 28th July 1979. ,

.1,

' 13ABLI RAM GOYAL,

Presidenting Officer,'Labour Court-, Haryann,

Rohtak.

PART HARYANA GOVT GAZ., SEPT. IS, 1979 (BHDR. 27, 1901 SAKA) 1507

Endstt. No. 1868, dated 7th August 1979

Forwarded, (four copies) to the Secretary to Gmernment of Haryana, Labour and EmploymentDepartment, Chandigarh as required under section 15 of the Industries Disputes Act, 1947.

13ABLI RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court Haryana,

Rohtalt.provisions' of section 17 of the Industrial Dis-

pute Act, 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947) th: Governor of Haryana is pleased tw publish the following awardof the Presidine Offieer, Labour Court, Rohtak in respect of the dispute between the workmen andthe Management of M S Diamond steel works. G.D. M tern Industrial Ehate, Bahadurgarh.

BEFORE SHRT BABU RAM GOYA); PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURTHARYANA, ROHTAK

o

Reference No. 225 of 1978.

Between

SERI HARE PARK ASH WORKM AN AND THF MACS AGMBNT OF 3,f/S. DIAMOND STEELWGRKS ,9-- D, MODERN INDHSTRI AL ESTA7 F, BAHADIlRGARH.

Present:- -

Shri Rajinder Singh for the workman.

Shri M.M. Kattshal along with Shri Sardari Lal, Proprietor of the respondent manage-ment.

AWARD

By order No- ID/ SPT/ 81- 18/ 35192, Dated 27.7.78, the Governor of Haryana referred thefollowing dispute between the management of MIS- Diamond Steel Works, 9 - D, Modern IndustrialEstate, Bahadurgarh and its workman Shri H tri Parkash to this Court for adjudication in exerciseof the powirs conferred by Clasue (e) of sub section (1) of section le of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947.

"Whether the termination of service of Shri Hari Parkash was justified and in order ?if not , to what relief' is he enttiled ? "

On reciept of order of reference, notices were issued to the parties. The parties appeared andfiled their pleadings. On the pleading of the parties the following issues were framed by my learned pre-decessor on 8.2.1979:--

1. Whether the workman was appointed as a learner, if so to what effect ?

Whether the termination of seeviee was justified and in order ?

,, Whether the workman was absent from 18.5.78 to 31.5.78 if so to what effect,

4. Relief.

And fixed the ease for evidence of me management. on 117.79 parties arrived at a mutualsettlement and made toe !Alt wing

S tatement of Shri Rajlnder Singh, representative of the workman.

The workman has settled his ea*: with the managewent in full and final settlement of his claimand accounts and disputes for a s u m of Rs .325/;---. The workmen have recieved the same and no dis-pute is left and foregoes his right of ren statement or any othez claim.

Statement of Shri Sardari Lai, Proprietor of the management.

" I have heard the s element of Sari RajindeF Singh which is triee. 9 ite workman has takena sum of Rs. rull and final settlement of his claim and by virtue of this settlement he forgoes his right of rein statetnent also."

15C8 F AIN A C C M CM., STP7 . 18, 1979 (Bprp. ,,e7,1901 SAKA) [TAM I

1, thereifore, answer this reference and give no dispute award.

Dated the 28th July, 1979.RAM GOYAL,

Presiding Officer,Labour Court, Haryana

Rohtak.

Endstt. No. 18369, dated 7 August 1979.

Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary to Government of Haryana, Labour and EmploymentChpartment, Caandigarh si rapi red under seetioa 15 of the Industrial Disputes Aot, 1947.

BABU RAM GOYAL

Presiding .Officer,Labour Court, Haryana,

Rolttak.

N i . 11(112) of the provision of section 17 of' the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 (Act Na. XIV of 1947), the Governor of Haryana is pleased to publish the following award of thePresiding Officer, IndustrialTribuaal, Faridabad in respect of the dispute between the workman and the manage-ment of M/s, Micro _Enterprises Faridabad;

'BEFORE SHRI NATHU RAM SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,HARYANA, FARIDABADI

Reference No. 132 of 19781:21

between

t ,SHRI RAM AUTAR SHARMA, WORKMAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF MIS MICRO-1 ENTERPRISES, FARIDABAD

Shri P. K. De for the workman.N e 0 1 3 for the management.

AWARD

Bj or br 4 . 101 7323, (tiled the 10th May, 1978 the Governor of Haryana referred thethllo ming dispute between the management of M/s, Micro Enterprises, Faridabad and its workmanShri Ram Avtar Sher ma, to this Tribunal, for adjudication, in exercise of the powers conferredby Clause (d) of sub -section (I) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act.

`-Wdether tta3 tsrininstioa of services of Shri RamIf aot, to what relief is he entitled?

Autar was justified and in order.

Oa of the order of refernce, notices were itsued to the parties. The parties appeared.But thereaftar the malagement did not appear on the last date fixed. Then ex-parte proceedings

were ordered against the management. ,Lastly the representative for the workman, stated that hedid tu t know the whereabouts of the wokrnaa and did not want that the reference be fproceededwith. He prayed for filing the reference In view of the statement of the representative forthe workman, I give my award that. the termination of services of the workman was justified and inorder. He is not entitled to any relief.

Dated 8th August, 1979.

NATHU RAM SHARMA,

Presiding Officer,Industrial Tribunal Haryana,

Faridabad.Nc. 774, dated 16th August, 1979.1,

Forwarded (four copies) to the Secretary to GOeinment of Haryana, Labour and Employment Departments_ . . . . _ . . . . . .Chandigarh as required under section i or the Industr 'at Disputes ACT.NATHU RAM SHARMA,

Presiding Officer,ndustrial Tribunal Haryana,

Faridabad.

S I S S i LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT I_87900.pdf · Rajipur Jhajra 108 Ambala. Surajpur 109 -...

Documents

Transcript of S I S S i LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT I_87900.pdf · Rajipur Jhajra 108 Ambala. Surajpur 109 -...