← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWP/5785/2000disposed off

Umendra Ram Sahu v. State Of M.P. And ORS.

2017-05-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP No. 5785 of 2000 Umendra Ram Sahu, S/o Shri Jagat Ram, Aged about 30 years, Employed at B.D.A. Bilapsur as sahayak on daily wage, R/o Chingarajpara, P.O. Chantidiha, Tahsil & Dist.-Bilaspur (MP) (Now CG) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Madhya Pradesh, through its Secretary, Housing & Environment Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (MP)

2. Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, through the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

3. The Chief Executive Engineer, Bilaspur Development Authority, Vyapar Bihar, Ring Road, Bilaspur (MP) (Now CG)

4. The Labour Officer, Govt. Madhya Pradesh, Labour Officer Office, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur (MP) (Now CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.Vikas Dubey, Advocate For State : Mr.Arun Sao, Dy.A.G.

For Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur : Ms Sareena Khan under the authority of Mr.M.K.Bhaduri, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 04/05/2017 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that services of the petitioner have been illegally terminated by the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur and he has not been taken back in service. In fact, he is entitled to be reinstated in service.

2.

Learned counsel for the State and Corporation would submit that the petitioner is free to raise the industrial dispute as his services have been terminated way back in the year 2000.

3.

Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make an application before the appropriate Government for referring the matter to the Labour Court raising industrial dispute. If the petitioner files an application before the appropriate Government, the Government will do well and to consider/refer the matter to the Labour Court as to whether the termination of the petitioner is illegal and whether he is entitled to be reinstated with service benefits.

4.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stands disposed off. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE B/-