HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.305 of 2004 (M/S) Ram Sewak Kashyap S/o Shri Bachchu Lal … Petitioner Versus Nagar Palika Kichcha District U. S. Nagar …. Respondent Dated:- 30th June, 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Heard Sri A. N. Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H. S. Dhillon, the learned counsel holding the brief of Sri S. S. Chauhan, the learned counsel for the respondent. The petitioner has assailed the validity and legality of the award passed by the Labour Court by which the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. The brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is that the petitioner was appointed as a Peon with the respondent and that his services was arbitrarily terminated by an oral order dated 30th March, 1991. It transpires that the petitioner raised a claim before the State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow with regard to the setting aside the oral order of termination and also made a prayer that his services should be regularised. The said claim was rejected on merit by the Tribunal by an order dated 21 October, 1996. Not being satisfied with the aforesaid order, the petitioner raised a reference under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, which was eventually referred to the Labour Court for adjudication by an order dated 18.06.1998. The dispute so referred was something like this:- “Whether the employer was justified in terminating the services of the workman on 30th March, 1991? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to?” The Labour Court, after considering the material evidence on record, came to a conclusion that the question relating to the 2 termination of the petitioner has already been adjudicated by the Public Service Tribunal and, therefore, the same issue cannot be adjudicated afresh under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court, consequently, declined to grant any relief to the workman. The petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Dharam Bir Singh Vs. Mansi Sahakari Avas Ltd. & others 2006 SCC (L&S) 390. In my opinion, the said decision is not applicable to the present facts and circumstances of the case. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length, this court is of the opinion that if two forums are provided to a person for the redressal of his grievance, the choice is that of the person concerned, but, having approached a particular forum and the matter has been adjudicated on merits, it is no longer open to the said person to approach another forum for the redressal of the same grievance. The principle of constructive res judicata will be squarely applicable. In view of the aforesaid, the court finds that the Labour Court was justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 30.06.2010 LSR