IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4804/02 Prahlad Singh vs. Labour Court No.2 & Anr. Date of order : 2/7/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Ranvir Singh for the petitioner. ****** This writ petition is directed against the award passed by the Labour Court No.2, Jaipur dated 23.9.2000 by which the learned Labour Court vide the said award answered the reference made to it by the appropriate Government as to the validity of the action of the respondent Management in terminating his services on the premises that such retrenchment was valid because compliance of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was made. Shri Ranvir Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that neither notice as contemplated by section 25-F was given to the petitioner, nor was he paid the notice pay. It was argued that no seniority list was published prior to retrenchment of the petitioner. The management failed to produce any evidence to show as to on whose presence the notice and compensation was offered or paid to the petitioner. There was no complaint against the working of the petitioner and that he was discharging his duties satisfactorily. The respondents yet arbitrarily removed him from service. All these aspects of the matter have not been received proper considerations. The learned Labour Court which has failed to appreciate the evidence led before it in true perspective. The award of the Labour Court is therefore liable to be set aside. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the award and other material forming part of the record, I find that in the award the learned Labour Court has notwithstanding evidence adduced before it has found that the period of working of the petitioner was confined from 28.5.1990 to 24.4.1991. Although, the petitioner asserted before the Labour Court what he is asserting now but that was refuted by the respondent management. He adduced the evidence in support of his case by producing the affidavits of Chagan Singh Shekhawat, K.C. Singh and Umesh Joshi, Assistant Manager. The respondents in their evidence through these witnesses proved that the petitioner was offered notice together with notice pay of one month in the sum of Rs.1200/- and compensation of Rs.695/- which the petitioner declined to accept. All the above three witnesses were subject to cross examination on their version in the affidavits. Upon petitioner's declining to accept the notice pay and compensation, the said notice was sent to him under postal certificate. The learned Labour Court found that the petitioner could not prove that the compliance of Section 25-F was not made while terminating his service. This being a finding of fact, I do not find any valid reason to interfere such finding which is based on correct appreciation of evidence. The award passed by the learned Labour Court does not suffer from any infirmity. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/