THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27389 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioners were engaged as NMRs by the Roads and Buildings Department of Government of A.P. Alleging that they were terminated orally in contravention of the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act (for short ‘the Act’), the petitioners filed I.D.No.5 of 1997 and batch before the Labour Court, Warnagal. The Labour Court allowed the I.Ds and directed reinstatement of the petitioners and payment of back wages. The awards have become final. The petitioners filed execution petitions for enforcement of awards. At that stage, the Government in Transport, Roads and Buildings Department issued G.O.Rt.No.1621, dated 29.11.2007. Through the said G.O., not only the amount of back wages, but also three months salary in lieu of notice of retrenchment, under Section 25- F of the Act, was directed to be paid. The petitioners feel aggrieved by that direction. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and lerned Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings. The awards passed in favour of the petitioners directing their reinstatement and payment of back wages became final. The respondents were under obligation to reinstate the petitioners and to pay the back wages. Without there being execution proceedings, the impugned G.O. was issued. Had it been for the back wages, there would not have been any grievance for the petitioners. The intention of the respondents was that even while the back wages are paid the service of the petitioners be retrenched, by paying three months salary, in lieu of notice. An employer is no doubt entitled to retrench its workman by issuing notice of three months or by offering three months salary. In either of events, there must be notice, as such. Mere payment of salary for a period of three months cannot constitute the compliance of Section 25-F of the Act, unless a notice, indicating the reasons for retrenchment is issued. Therefore, the writ petition is partly allowed setting aside that portion of the impugned G.O. through which the respondents offered to pay the retrenchment compensation. It is however, made clear that it shall be open for the respondents to take necessary steps in accordance with law for retrenchment of the petitioners, if they, so intend. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. 17th June, 2010 Js.