{^/ £B THE HIGH COURT OW JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH NP Ho. 2.5~^>S OF 2001 PBTITIONER -...^- RESPGBSDEHTS ^r^ .s?'^ . ^'^ ^•xl^''...- .^^•"" Ccnservator o£ Forest Cum General Manager Laghu Vanopaj Sangh Bilaspur Circie BILASPUP. CHHATTISGARH V E R S U S 1. Anil Kumar Kaiwarth S/o.. Makhanlal Kaivarth R/o Jarhabhatha Durga Mandir Ch^Ark Kevat Mohalla BILASPUR CTfHATTISGARH 2- Presiding Officer Labour Court BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH^. ^••' i^RIT PETITION UHDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTIOS OF IBDIA .^^S-i:-^—-. _ XI-HC-22 3:H^['^T •^n^'^'nt^ ^^N^td ^- ^ -^ ^<f^ ^%<: T ^"^ ~^iWrW, W^W^, !^<Y1 ..K/.^..50^.._ .„ ^f^ET'^W^"":"'""""""""""""~""M 2fN) -^ "^<T[W ^fN 08-07-2002 Shri Ranbir Siagh^ Govt. A^lvocate for fhe petitioner. Haviag heard Shri Ranbir jSnigh, learaed cotinsel for fhe petitioner, fhe Court is not iojclined to entertain tihds writ petition. The termiaation of fhe ^T-^t-Nh "W^JT ^ ft^ Tf^zdR ^ 3-:IFW •3i'T&^T rcspoiident No.l has been quashed for non-compliance of p^ovisions contaiaed m Section 25(F) of the Industrial Dispute ^ct, 1947. It is not disputed that fhe said respondent No. 1 h^d served iiader fhe petitioner fix>m May 1990 to Jaaziary 2000 when his sendces were terEDinated, It is ftrrther not di^puted that oialy one moafh?s salaiy was ofifercd, which was obyfousty not ia conformily with fhe provisions contaioied in Sectic^n 25(F) of the Act c^b^t On fhe adaxiitted position n^ error has been comxaitted by fhe Labour Court, Bilaspur, in settmg-aside ffae oxder of 1 temunation aad oxderuig for reiasjtateinent with back wages. In view of above obseru|atioiis, fhe petition stands disioissed. i Sd/- j P.C.Naik 1 Judge