IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 12601 of 2007. Date of Decision : January 21, 2009. Varinder Kumar. ...... Petitioner. Versus. The Presiding Officer, Gurdaspur, and others. ...... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present: Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate, for the respondent No. 2. -.- AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). Through this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the award dated 08.06.2006 (Annexure-P-8), passed by the Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Gurdaspur, vide which the claim as put forth by the petitioner-workman, was rejected and the reference was answered against him. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the services of the petitioner-workman was terminated orally on phone and charge was taken from him on 07.05.2001. He was never intimated that he has been transferred from Batala, rather his stand is that on his termination, there was no question of he being transferred out of Batala and these documents are all fabricated and manufactured to scuttle the claim of the petitioner-workman. C.W.P. No. 12601 of 2007. Counsel for the respondent on the other hand has submitted that the appointment letter has been placed on record of the Labour Court as Ex. M.3, according to which there was a stipulation in condition 4 that the service of the petitioner-workman was transferable to any office existing or/and that might be opened in future of the Company in India and abroad. On this basis, he submits that there was a clear stipulation provided in the appointment letter for the services of the petitioner- workman to be a transferable one. It is under this condition that the workman was transferred from Batala to Delhi in the same capacity with immediate effect i.e. 27.04.2001 and the workman failed to comply with such directions as given in the transfer orders. On his non joining of duty, again on 10.07.2002, a letter was issued to him, copy whereof has been placed on record as mark X3 and thereafter another letter dated 13.01.2003 has been issued which has been placed on record as mark X4. He on the basis of the evidence which has been placed on record before the Labour Court, has submitted that it is a case where the petitioner-workman has abandoned the job and on that basis it cannot be said that the services of the petitioner-workman has been terminated. He further submits that an offer was made to the petitioner-workman even during the conciliation proceedings and before the Labour Court but the petitioner-workman has not accepted this offer. Counsel for the petitioner is unable to controvert the assertions put forth by counsel for the respondent. I have gone through the impugned award dated 08.06.2006 (Annexure-P-8) and am of the considered opinion that the finding as recorded by the Labour Court is based on the evidence which has been -2- C.W.P. No. 12601 of 2007. produced by the respective parties on the basis of the pleadings made before it. No illegality has been found in the award passed by the Labour Court. In view of the above, the present writ petition is dismissed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE January 21, 2009. sjks. -3-