THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.14097 of 1999 Dated: 08.02.2010 Between: P.Ganesh. .. Petitioner And The Labour Court-I Rep. by its Presiding Officer, Hyderabad, and others .. Respondents ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the award dated 07.08.1998 passed in I.D.No.75 of 1994 on the file of the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, the 1st respondent herein, whereunder the application, under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, filed by the petitioner-workman to set aside the order of his termination with effect from 07.12.1993 and for his reinstatement with full backwages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits, was dismissed. Petitioner is the workman and respondents 2 and 3 are the Management. It appears, the petitioner-workman was appointed as a Medical Practitioner in the respondent Company on 08.08.1988. While so, on 21.11.1991, he was transferred to Guna, Indore District, Madhya Pradesh, one of the units of the respondent Company. However, he protested the said transfer and informed the Management about his going on indefinite strike, by his letter dated 02.12.1991. Thereafter, the Management, not accepting the request of the petitioner to cancel the order of his transfer, ultimately, by its letter dated 07.12.1993, construed that the petitioner left his employment on his own accord. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred I.D.No.75 of 1994 on the file of the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, stating that he was not given notice and no enquiry was conducted before terminating him from service, that his termination was in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, and that his willingness to join duty at Guna was refused by letter dated 04.05.1994, and therefore, he sought to set aside the order of his termination. The Management filed counter affidavit before the Court below stating that the petitioner was never terminated from service and he himself left the job on his own accord and thus, the petition is not maintainable. On behalf of the workman, the workman himself was examined as WW.1 and Exs.W1 to W14 were marked on his behalf. On behalf of the Management, its Manager was examined as MW.1 and Exs.M1 to M17 were marked on their behalf. The Labour Court, after a detailed consideration of the matter, dismissed the I.D. by the impugned award dated 07.08.1998, holding that the petitioner himself abandoned the job, that there is no violation of unfair trade practice exhibited or exercised by the Management towards the petitioner and that it has no jurisdiction to maintain the application. Questioning the said award, the present writ petition is filed by the workman. Learned counsel for the petitioner-workman strenuously contended that though the workman sought to join duty at Guna on 25.04.1994, the Management refused to allow the petitioner to join duty, by letter dated 04.05.1994, that no charges were framed against the petitioner, that no explanation was sought by the petitioner and no disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, and therefore, the action of the Management amounts to illegal termination of the services of the petitioner and violation of principles of natural justice and the provisions of Section 25 of the I.D. Act. Sri C.R. Sridharan, learned counsel for the respondent Management, strenuously contended that the petitioner, having sit over the matter for 2 ½ years i.e., 21.11.1991 to 25.04.1994, cannot come and express his willingness to join duty after such a long period and, therefore, it cannot be said that the services of the petitioner are terminated illegally. I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on either side and perused the impugned award and other material made available on record. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner, having received the transfer order dated 21.11.1991, did not join duty at the new place i.e., Guna, Indore District, Madhya Pradesh, and instead submitted several representations to the Management seeking cancellation of his transfer order, to which the Management did not agree, and ultimately, sent a letter dated 07.12.1993, construing that the petitioner has left the employment on his own accord as he did not avail the opportunity of reporting to duty at Guna and there was no communication from him from April 7,1993. Thereafter, the petitioner sought to join duty at Guna on 25.04.1994, but the Management refused for the same. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner himself did not attend to duties for a long period and thereby abandoned his services, and the Management cannot be said to have illegally terminated the petitioner. That apart, a careful reading of the impugned order would show that the petitioner, in his cross-examination, has admitted that he joined services of another Organisation called Elders Health Care Private Limited, Hyderabad, on 02.01.1995, and he was admitted to Provident Fund therein. Even otherwise, the present I.D. filed by the petitioner seems to be speculative in its nature. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Labour Court has considered the matter in right perspective and, accordingly, dismissed the I.D. by the impugned award. Thus, I find no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 08.02.2010 v v