Somadula Narasimhulu v. The Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Visakhpatnam.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.8628 of 2002 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records connected to order dated 29.06.2001 in I.D.No.48/1999 passed by the Industrial Tribunal and quash or set aside the same as illegal and arbitrary.

Heard learned Standing counsel for petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was appointed as N.M.R in the 2nd respondent Corporation on 02.02.1993 and was continued in service till 30.10.1994. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent had terminated the services of the petitioner on 30.10.1994.

Questioning the same, the petitioner had filed I.D.No.44 of 1999 before the labour Court and the labour Court vide orders dated 29.09.2001 dismissed the ID preferred by the petitioner. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed. It has been contended by the petitioner that he was appointed on compassionate grounds on demise of his mother as a regular employee in the respondent Corporation and his mother expired while she was discharging her duty with the 2nd respondent Corporation.

This Court, after considering the rival submissions of both the parties is of the considered view that the petitioner continued

in the 2nd respondent Corporation for 1 1⁄2 years and he was terminated on 30.10.1994. Nearly after five years of termination, petitioner has filed I.D.No.44 of 1999 before the labour Court and the labour Court had dismissed the said ID. No averment is made in the affidavit that the petitioner has completed 240 days of service except stating that he was appointed on 02.02.1993 and he continued upto 30.10.1994. No specific plea is taken by the petitioner that he continuously worked in the 2nd respondent Corporation. Until and unless a grave irregularity or illegality is pointed out, this Court cannot interfere with the orders passed by the labour Court.

Therefore, there are no merits in the writ petition and accordingly is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. _______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI,J Dt: 22.11.2018 dv