Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Application No. 336 of 1971, decided on 5th January 1972.
------
---‑ Unlawful termination Compensation for forced un‑employment ‑ Applicant approaching Court after great delay of about three years‑Compensation for forced un employment, in circumstances, refused Industrial Relations Ordi nance (XXIII of 1969), S. 34.
Allana I. Fulhany for Applicant.
Nemo for Respondent.
‑In this appli cation under section 34 of the I. R.. O., 1969, the applicant claims his dues from the respondent on account of illegal termination of service.
The applicant's case is that he was the permanent workman of the respondent Printing Press where over 70 workers were employed. The respondent terminated his services unlawful without any charge‑sheet, show‑cause notice or any termination order. He therefore, claims the following dues:‑.
| Rs. (a) Earned Wages from 1st December 1968, to 11th December 1968. 133.00 (b) Notice Pay, equal to 1 month's salary 400.00 (c) Gratuity for eight years service 1,600.00 Total : 2,133.00 |
(d) Compensation for the forced unemployment as the Court deems fit
Several summons were issued to the respondent but could not be served as it was reported that the premises were closed. Consequently, there is no reply statement from the respondent and the case proceeded ex parte.
The applicant has sworn an affidavit in support of his contention, reiterating the averments made in the application. He has not stated as to when he was discharged. But, fit appears from the dues he has claimed that he was discharged on 11th December 1968. He states in the affidavit that, on account of being unaware of the law, he had first approached the authorities under the Shops Act but was directed to seek relief from this Court.
Since the claim of the applicant stands unchallenged, hiss application is granted and he is awarded the dues mentioned at (a), (b) and (c) in. the affidavit amounting to Rs. 2,133.00 (Rupees two thousand one hundred thirty‑three only). Com pensation for forced unemployment is not awarded to him as he has come after great delay in the Court.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer