IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1356 OF 2007 (MS) (Old NO. 30967 OF 1998) State of U.P. & another. …………..Petitioners. Versus Ghanshyam and others. …………..Respondents. Sri Gopal Narian, Brief Holder for the State/Petitioners. Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocate for the respondent no. 1. 24 th June, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. This writ petition is directed against the award dated 24.6.1995 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour, Court, Dehradun / respondent no. 2 in Reference Case No. 194 of 1992. 2. Dispute was referred by the State Government vide Govt. Notification No. 8177/Shra. Aa/36- Shram(1) CP 6 / 91 Dehradun dated 05.09.1992 under Section 4 K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The reference was made in following terms: “Whether the termination of the services of workman Ghanshyam S/o Sri Dalip from 12.8.1990 is unjustified and/or illegal, if yes, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to get?” 3. The case of the plaintiff is that he was working on the post of Beldar from August, 1987, regularly and till the termination of his service i.e. upto 12.8.1990, he was working on that post continuously. Workman has submitted that his services were terminated without giving any prior notice, which is unjustified and improper. The workman has prayed for being reinstated with full wages. 4. Employer has not rebutted the contention of the workman made in the affidavit filed in support of his claim. 5. On the pleadings of the parties, the Labour Court passed award dated 24.6.1995 directing the Employer first to reinstate the workman concerned in service as regular employee and then only to pay 50% of the back wages. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the award passed by the tribunal concerned. 7. The Tribunal concerned, while passing the impugned award, has recorded a finding that the employer has terminated the services of the workman without giving prior notice or one month’s salary, which is in violation of Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and I am of the view that since there was violation of Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the award was rightly passed by the tribunal concerned and there is no infirmity of illegality in the said award. The impugned award dated 24.6.1995 is confirmed. 8. Consequently, writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 24.06.2008 Rathour/SKS