1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6714/2005 Om Prakash v. Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur & Anr. Date of Order :: 8th May, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Mahesh Bora, for the petitioner. Mr. R.S.Saluja, for the respondents. .... This petition for writ is preferred to challenge validity, correctness and propriety of the award dated 3.3.2004 passed by learned Labour Court, Jodhpur. The appropriate government by a notification dated 8.9.1999 referred an industrial dispute for its adjudication to Labour Court, in the terms that “whether the employer Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur and the Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur are right in not re- employing their retrenched employee, the workman Om Prakash. If not, then for what relief the workman is entitled?” The petitioner workman was retrenched from service of the employer Corporation on 28.3.1986. In the year 1996 a process of fresh recruitment was initiated wherein the petitioner workman was also an aspirant. The candidature of the petitioner was considered, however, no appointment was accorded to 2 him, thus, the dispute was raised and that was referred for its adjudication. The Labour Court, while answering the reference, held that an opportunity to be considered for appointment was given and the same was adequate compliance of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1947”). The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that as per the provisions of Section 25-H of the Act of 1947 the preference is required to be given to the retrenched employee while making fresh recruitment and, therefore, the Labour Court erred while, holding that consideration for recruitment is adequate compliance of the provisions referred above. Heard counsel for the parties. As per Section 25-H of the Act of 1947 “where any workmen are retrenched and the employer proposes to take into his employ and persons, he shall, in such manner as may be prescribed, give an opportunity to the retrenched workmen who are citizens of India to offer themselves for re-employment, and such retrenched workmen who offer themselves for re- employment shall have preference over other persons”. A bare reading of the provisions of Section 25-H of the Act of 1947, it is apparent that it is not 3 only consideration but a preference is required to be given while making re-employment. In the instant matter the respondent Corporation considered candidature of the petitioner at the same pedestal as it was made for other aspirants. The petitioner being a retrenched employee was entitled for getting preference over other aspirants for re-employment. In view of it the Labour Court erred while holding that consideration of the petitioner for re-employment was the sufficient compliance of the provisions of Section 25-H of the Act of 1947. The award, for the reasons mentioned above, is bad in eye of law. Accordingly, the petition for writ is allowed. The award impugned dated 3.3.2004, passed by Labour Court, Jodhpur is quashed. The reference made by the appropriate government under the notification dated 8.9.1999 is answered in the terms that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for re- employment by getting preference over other persons considered for employment alongwith him. A direction is accordingly given to the employer Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur to reconsider the petitioner's candidature for employment by giving preference to him vis-a-vis other incumbents for re-employment. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. Kkm/ps.