Sewan Kumar Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No. 98 of 2016 Sewan Kumar Chandrakar S/o Shri Ratanlal Chandrakar, Aged About 47 Years R/o Village & Post Gucchapali Via Bagbahara, Tahsil & District Mahasamund, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
2. Water Resources Department, Through Chief Engineer (Research), Sinchai Bhavan, G. E. Road, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
3. Water Resources Department, Through Director, Hydro Metrology, Sinchai Bhavan, G.E. Road, Raipur, Distt Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
4. Deputy Director, Hydro, Hydro Metrology, Division No.4, Sinchai Colony, Shanti Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
5. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No.1, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) -----Respondents Writ Appeal No. 99 of 2016 Shiv Kumar Chandrakar S/o Shri Fekuram Chandrakar, Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Paraswani, Post Birkoni, Tahsil & District Mahasamund, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
2. Water Resources Department, Through Chief Engineer (Research), Sinchai Bhavan, G.E. Road, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
3. Water Resources Department, Through Director, Hydro Metrology, Sinchai Bhavan, G.E. Road, Raipur, Distt Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
4. Deputy Director, Hydro, Hydro Metrology, Division No.4, Sinchai Colony, Shanti Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
5. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No.1, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Appellants:
Shri Sudeep Johri, Advocate.
For Respondents/State:
Shri Prafull Bharat, Additional Advocate General.
Hon'ble The Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Judgment on Board Per Navin Sinha, Chief Justice 26/02/2016 1.
The present appeals arise from common order dated 22.12.2015 passed in W.P.(L) Nos.175/2013 and 173/2013. The Learned Single Judge held that those who had completed more than ten years before the retrenchment in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act were entitled to the relief for reinstatement and those who had worked for periods lesser than that were only entitled for compensation and not for orders of reinstatement.
2.
Learned Counsel for the parties are agreed that the issue stands considered by order dated 27.11.2015 in Writ Appeal No.568/2015. 3.
The present appeals are therefore disposed in terms as order dated 27.11.2015 in Writ Appeal No.568/2015 and analogous appeals. Sd/- Sd/- (Navin Sinha) (P. Sam Koshy) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Priya