1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4243/1997 PRITHVI SINGH VS. THE CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL & ANR. DATE OF ORDER : 08.10.2009. HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. Hemant Shrimali for the petitioner. Mr. H.K. Mahobia for the respondents. To assail validity, correctness and propriety of the award dated 27.09.1995 passed by the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur, this petition for writ is preferred. A reference was made by the appropriate government to the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur in the terms that “Whether the Management of the Bank of Baroda was just and legal in terminating its workman Prithvi Singh from the service on 1.11.85 and further in not providing opportunity for employment as per provisions of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?” If not, then for what relief, the workman is entitled?” Learned Tribunal after examining entire material available on record, reached at the conclusion that there was no error in termination of the workman, however, also held that there was violation of the provisions of Section 25-H of the Industrial 2 Disputes Act, 1947. A direction was accordingly given to make payment of compensation to the workman as per para 522(4) of the Shastri Award. The workman was also declared entitled to receive amount as compensation in equivalence to the pay received by other temporary employees, who are employed ignoring petitioner's preference. At the threshold, it is informed by learned counsel for the parties that to challenge the award impugned, a petition for writ is also filed by the employer, which is pending consideration before Jaipur Bench of this Court. It is also informed that in compliance of the directions given under the award impugned, a sum of Rs.1,15,597/- has already paid to the petitioner on 21.11.2000. The only contention advanced by the counsel for the petitioner is to provide one opportunity to the petitioner to be considered for appointment with preferential basis. I have examined the award impugned. As per provisions of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, a retrenched workman is having a right to be considered on preferential basis for employment, if the employer proposes to take into his employment any person. In the instant matter, for 3 violation of the provisions of Section 25-H of the Act of 1947, adequate compensation has already been given by the employer and as such, I do not find any error in the award impugned. Accordingly, the petition for writ is dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/