1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6492 of 1989 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ================================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================== K T PANDYA & 1 - Petitioner(s) Versus EXECUTIVE ENGINEER & 1 - Respondent(s) ================================================================== Appearance : MR MUKESH H RATHOD for Petitioner No(s).: 1,2. MR K L PANDYA AGP for Respondent No(s).: 1,2. ============================================================== CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 15/07/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT 1.0 The petitioners have challenged the award dated 31.03.1989 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot, in References 2 No.2115 of 1986 and 2116 of 1986, whereby both the references were rejected. 2.0 The petitioners herein were working as work-charge employees with the respondent. Both were relieved from the duties in the year 1985. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, they raised a dispute, which ultimately came to be referred to the Labour Court by way of references. The Labour Court, by impugned order, rejected both the references. Hence, this petition. 3.0 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. The Labour Court has recorded a finding that both the workmen were relieved from the duties after following the due procedure of law. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by the Labour Court in its impugned order while rejecting the references and hence, find no reason to interfere in this petition. 4.0 In above view of the matter, this petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. (K. S. JHAVERI, J.) pravin/ * 3